Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

lughnasadh OP t1_iux1pz7 wrote

Submission Statement

The US capital markets regularly throw billions, if not tens of billions, at technology companies whose business models stretch credulity. Uber has raised $25 billion, and never once turned a profit.

Which raises the question, why aren't they interested in 3D printing of houses? There is a massive shortage of houses around the world and the construction staff to build them. Country after country on every continent lacks housing, poor and rich countries alike. It seems reasonable to assume global demand for 3D printed houses could be counted in the tens of millions, perhaps even more.

Apis Cor has a demonstrable record of achievement with its technology. Their most famous construction in Dubai looks of a standard many people would be perfectly happy with as a dwelling.

Yet they and the rest of this sector are shunned by capital markets - what gives?

0

Zeniphyre t1_iux6e6i wrote

It's new technology that most common folks have not even heard of. This is not uncommon.

8

series_hybrid t1_iux7qmm wrote

The thing I like most is that in a couple days, we are able to throw up a "waterproof shell", and that is the hardest part.

Once the foundation, walls, roof, doors and windows are in...the considerable interior work can proceed regardless of the weather.

It also provides a "reasonably" safe place for the materials and tools to be stored.

5

Zeniphyre t1_iux7wox wrote

Oh totally. I love the technology. The 3D printing field is incredibly versatile.

1

series_hybrid t1_iuxfwp2 wrote

My sister had a house built in stages. They bought a desirable lot as soon as a development opened up.

They got plans made, and instead of financing the entire build, they got a home equity loan to build the foundation and shell (walls, roof, doors, windows, etc).

At that point, they had an asset that was worth something, and they could then take out a completion loan against the structure, and its equity.

This staged process allowed them to have he second house built, and they could then take their time moving in, and selling the first house.

2

gredr t1_iv0ojqo wrote

This isn't exactly innovative. Construction loans have been a thing for a long time.

1

series_hybrid t1_iv18ecx wrote

I only meant to include it as a point of reference for younger readers who are not familiar with it.

Staged construction Ioan's are well-suited to the 3D printing of the shell of a new home.

1

gredr t1_iv1fouf wrote

Construction loans are indeed well-suited to construction projects, yes. That is correct. Nothing interesting here in relation to 3D printed structures.

1

series_hybrid t1_iv1i6gl wrote

I disagree, but I do respect your opinion may remain different than mine.

1

unit2981 t1_iuy0ihc wrote

I build home professionally and I have a 3d printer. In the amount of time site prep to get these things operating, we could have already framed and sheathed a house. Even with basic 3d printing, we need to level the bed and if it's out of level the print fails.

If I can just get some lumber and some guys, who don't care if the site is not level, and frame a house up in a few days. Why would I bother with getting a super expensive concrete jet and specialized know how.

4

JessMeNU-CSGO t1_iuy6mnq wrote

Like most tech, the early stages are proving grounds on whether it's possible to do, now the challenge is feasibility in cost. The labor market for building homes is pretty one sided as well. Would it be fair to say the contractors who are actually on site doing the framing, putting sheathing, and hoisting rafters get less than $10 an hour in some cases? Don't get me wrong, I'm not personally attacking you or anyone who employs manual labor at such a low rate, but those costs place a strain on the working class. Technology was meant to make life more comfortable and accessible to the masses. I think that's the bigger picture here.

5