How come more people don't build homes underground?

[FoBoT]

Originally posted by: mobobuff
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOODING. Unless you buried it in a mountain side or the top of a very large hill.

yeah, water/drainage would be a big cost

also, the walls would be much different (cost more $) to withstand the earth than a conventional above ground home. the walls of a normal house are relatively weak compared to what you would need underground (along with the water thing)

actually, there are many "earth contact" homes here in missouri
i noticed when we were house hunting last year that they have these type homes here that are half way to 3/4 buried. even my house has a walkout basement, so i guess in a way it is 1/4 buried, sorta

 

[OffTopic1]

Underground & adobe dwelling are use all over the world, however lack of natural lights, moisture/condensation, and earthquakes prohibited the wide spread of it.

%75 of Coober Pedy residents lives undergound.

Natural Building

 

[Brutuskend]

Originally posted by: FoBoT

Originally posted by: mobobuff
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOODING. Unless you buried it in a mountain side or the top of a very large hill.

yeah, water/drainage would be a big cost

also, the walls would be much different (cost more $) to withstand the earth than a conventional above ground home. the walls of a normal house are relatively weak compared to what you would need underground (along with the water thing)

Arches for strength.

And it seems with the materials we have now, making the house water tight shouldn't be a big problem.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: Brutuskend

Originally posted by: FoBoT

Originally posted by: mobobuff
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOODING. Unless you buried it in a mountain side or the top of a very large hill.

yeah, water/drainage would be a big cost

also, the walls would be much different (cost more $) to withstand the earth than a conventional above ground home. the walls of a normal house are relatively weak compared to what you would need underground (along with the water thing)

Arches for strength.

And it seems with the materials we have now, making the house water tight shouldn't be a big problem.

If water can't get in, then water can't get out. If there is any humidity and water can't escape, then this would cause a mold problem, wouldn't it?

 

[ed21x]

Originally posted by: Trygve
I always thought it was a great idea. It'd be really cool to have a house built into a mountainside as well.

One "compromise" idea that I'd thought of when I was little was to build it into the top of a hill with a hole in the middle and an open courtyard at the bottom. That'd give you light and ameliorate the flooding and drainage problems (by being built into a hill), but you'd still have the advantages of insulation, etc.

in that case, can't you just pile on dirt around your house to create a little hill? I think the point of the OP was to specifically build a house underground.

 

[Mo0o]

damp, insects, flooding, no view

 

[Brutuskend]

Ventilation shafts.

These would also double as air vents to bring fresh air in.

 

[dighn]

Originally posted by: Brutuskend
Ventilation shafts.

These would also double as air vents to bring fresh air in.

with all these extra things that you wouldn't need otherwise, this is getting pretty complex

besides, the thought of being underground would make me rather nervous unless it was military quality or something

 

[OffTopic1]

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: Brutuskend

Originally posted by: FoBoT

Originally posted by: mobobuff
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOODING. Unless you buried it in a mountain side or the top of a very large hill.

yeah, water/drainage would be a big cost

also, the walls would be much different (cost more $) to withstand the earth than a conventional above ground home. the walls of a normal house are relatively weak compared to what you would need underground (along with the water thing)

Arches for strength.

And it seems with the materials we have now, making the house water tight shouldn't be a big problem.

If water can't get in, then water can't get out. If there is any humidity and water can't escape, then this would cause a mold problem, wouldn't it?

Many construction of buildings that are embeded in the earth/mountain sides have condensation/mold problem. Updraft & ventilation designs can alleviate some of the head ache in drier climates, but still is a problem in wetter area.

 

[konakona]

i already live in a basement and have not once regretted chosing this room, especially with my highly irregular sleeping times

 

[Brutuskend]

Originally posted by: Mo0o
damp, insects, flooding, no view

As for no view.
You could have cameras outside pointing the were ever you would want a window to face then just mount a flat screen monitor on the wall where the window would normally be and you have a view!

Proper ventilation should take care of any dampness problem.

Insects would have a hard time getting through say 8 to 10 inches on concrete.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

I would think the best option would be for the home to be underground on 3 sides (side of a hill/dirt mound). It would prevent many of the problems.

 

[ragazzo]

don't know about you, but i enjoy looking out the open window, smelling the breeze, enjoying the warm sun, watching birds fly by and poop on my car, etc.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: Brutuskend

Originally posted by: Mo0o
damp, insects, flooding, no view

As for no view.
You could have cameras outside pointing the were ever you would want a window to face then just mount a flat screen monitor on the wall where the window would normally be and you have a view!

Proper ventilation should take care of any dampness problem.

Insects would have a hard time getting through say 8 to 10 inches on concrete.

They'll find a way in, they always do. Termites can easily follow pvc pipes into the house. I had ants that were coming in through a small hole in my tile grout. The tile was half way into the kitchen! :Q The house is only 2 years old, but somehow the ants had tunneled underneath the tile and came up through this hole.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: Brutuskend
Ventilation shafts.

These would also double as air vents to bring fresh air in.

homes have ventilation and soffet systems now, but humidity and mold is still a problem, especially in the south.

 

[Brutuskend]

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
I would think the best option would be for the home to be underground on 3 sides (side of a hill/dirt mound). It would prevent many of the problems.

Yeah, or another thought I had was to have a slanted roof where one side was above ground with windows pointed toward, well, whatever direction you decide would be best. This would let in light but you would still have a minimal amount of heat loss since most of the structure would still be underground.

 

[Mellman]

My current home has a basement with 3 sides underground, and 1/2 the back is exposed witha walkout. Also there are two windows on one side, just above ground. I've always thought an underground home would be awesome. I also wondered the costs of building two basements...be pretty neat to have two, that much extra room, but doesnt look like all that from outside the home.

 

[OffTopic1]

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
I would think the best option would be for the home to be underground on 3 sides (side of a hill/dirt mound). It would prevent many of the problems.

I haven't heard of any insect problem here in Vancouver BC, Canada, however the housing in North Vancouver/Squamish area that were built into the mountain side (have at least one expose face) have all kinds of problem with moisture even with severals ventilation redesign/upgrades.

[edit] I have heard that Australia have problems with pests/insects in undergound homes.

 

[RaDragon]

I think that you'd still pay a lot for environmental conditions because:
1) You don't have natural sunlight (can help heat up home during the winter)
2) Air needs to be recirculated daily -- you can't just crack open a window to let fresh air in
3) It's actually quite cold underground
4) More likely growth of mold and other bacteria in your underground home
5) You might as well live in a cave

 

[Rallispec]

umm... cost?

thier is no way it is cheaper to biuld a house underground, or even close to what it costs to build a traditional house.

And if cost isnt an issue - i'm sure you could buy some land and have an underground house built if you really wanted it. Cell phone reception would probably suck underground.

 

[OffTopic1]

Originally posted by: Mellman
My current home has a basement with 3 sides underground, and 1/2 the back is exposed witha walkout. Also there are two windows on one side, just above ground. I've always thought an underground home would be awesome. I also wondered the costs of building two basements...be pretty neat to have two, that much extra room, but doesnt look like all that from outside the home.

I looked in to building underground home with 1 or 2 sides expose about 10 years ago and it cost 2X as much as an above ground dwelling.

 

[Doggiedog]

Originally posted by: ActuaryTm

Originally posted by: Doggiedog
One word:

Molemen

No. Morlocks.

Was referring to "The Incredibles" not Time Machine

 

[RedRooster]

Con:
Neighborhood children would find it funny to pee in your chimney.

 

[Brutuskend]

Originally posted by: RedRooster
Con:
Neighborhood children would find it funny to pee in your chimney.

OK, well there's one I hadn't considered.

 

[Yax]

Hello!?!?!! We do build homes underground. Been doing it for years. All over the place, but the builders felt it more economical to build another home above it and call the underground one a basement.

Think about it, why would anyone just settle for an underground home when they can have two homes in one.