tofte project

December 13, 2002 5:41 PM

the tofte project cool web site. cool project. cool ideas. cool person. cool part of the country. cool use of flash. via k10k.net
posted by specialk420 (19 comments total)

Uh...So it's cool then?
posted by Richat at 5:47 PM on December 13, 2002

Seriously though, great looking site.
posted by Richat at 5:48 PM on December 13, 2002

i particularly like the northern minnesota accents
posted by specialk420 at 6:01 PM on December 13, 2002

Great looking site.

I wish the creators would send their self-appointed messiahs to convert the third world to "sustainable paradigm shift" by encouraging the masses to reproduce less quickly and in fewer numbers, and pollute not so much. (As a developing nation, China is not bound by the same goals for restraining emissions of carbon dioxide.)

In fact let's abandon housing altogether and live in warring cannibalistic nomadic convoys, occasionally foraging for roots, nuts and berries when the fresh meat supply runs out.

No wait, that would be cruel to roots, nuts and berries!
posted by hama7 at 6:16 PM on December 13, 2002

good point hama7!
posted by specialk420 at 6:22 PM on December 13, 2002

Just like, "STOP THINKING, start feeling, start caring."
posted by Recockulous at 7:16 PM on December 13, 2002

Just like, "STOP THINKING, start feeling, start caring."

Now that's a repulsive notion. Pretty site, though.
posted by rushmc at 7:45 PM on December 13, 2002

hama7, the term for sustainable development in the third world is "intermediate technology". If you want to learn more about it, one place to check out is ITDG.

Another place to look at what this lifestyle can mean (here in the first world) is Earthship.org. I think it's been mentioned here before.

And FYI hama7, China's CO2 emissions has actually been reduced by 17 percent since 1997, while it's economy has grown by 35 percent. More information on this can be found here.
posted by condour75 at 7:50 PM on December 13, 2002

should've fixed on preview: emissions have, while its. Hmm... maybe i'll go post a tellall confessional FPP on MetaTalk.
posted by condour75 at 7:51 PM on December 13, 2002

Thanks for the information condour75. I think this post illuminates another point, which is that conservation and sustainability is expensive. The couple on the website were discussing crane sizes used during the construction of the house which were chosen so as not to damage the trees. While this is admirable, it also costs a lot, and a family with less money might not be able to afford to make those choices.

In other words; which costs less: a regular old chicken, or a free-range, organically-fed chemical-free chicken?


Hmm... maybe i'll go post a tellall confessional FPP on MetaTalk.

Grab yourself by the collar and just get it over with.

posted by hama7 at 9:05 PM on December 13, 2002

y that seems a bit silly. But it's a refreshing change to see something like this, compaired to the McMansions that go up like hotcakes in my neck of the woods. I have to level with you, i'm not living in a tree or anything right now, I'm a meat-eater and I live in a crappy apartment with a gas range and PSE&G going into the house. But a project like this raises awareness of these methods, and any technology requires early adopters to get the ball rolling. Economy of scale will come with time. And in the long term, we'll all benefit from a commitment to conservation and efficiency.

I don't think even the rootin-est tootin-est republicans would argue with that. Hell, Teddy Roosevelt popularized the whole thing.
posted by condour75 at 9:28 PM on December 13, 2002

While this is admirable, it also costs a lot, and a family with less money might not be able to afford to make those choices.

But by being out there, doing this sort of thing, and talking about it, they make it possible for later development that is more cheaply done, in more accessible places, which means more available to households with less money.

Being an energy guy, I went straight to that section of the site, and once there, they make the point quickly (and while I don't know if the numbers are accurate, the point remains): For every dollar it costs to build a house, it costs $100 to run it for its lifespan. The cost of energy over time--that is, the use of energy over time--is a major expense, and putting a little more money up front can turn out big savings. Planning and developing with this in mind is going to be key to making it popularly available.
posted by claxton6 at 9:29 PM on December 13, 2002

Great link, specialk420 - both visually, and content wise....good stuff...um, what's the word I am looking for here? Cool, yah that's it!
posted by madamjujujive at 10:33 PM on December 13, 2002

I haven't had time to go through much of the site yet, but I wanted to respond to the comments here about that it's expensive to live sustainably. I don't necessarily think that's the case. Ianto from the Cob Cottage Company is notorious for how cheaply he lives and builds. He's a maniac recycler and almost all his materials he obtains for free.

Cob is a great way of building that takes lots of time and people, but has very little expense for materials (all you need is straw, sand, soil, and clay, plus material for the foundation and roof), needs no machinery more complicated than a wheelbarrow, and is sustainable. But it's easy to get people because building with cob is fun and creative! And we could all stand to slow the pace a bit.
posted by Emanuel at 11:58 PM on December 13, 2002

Fantastic link. Thanks.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 2:10 AM on December 14, 2002

What an awesome site. It was an excellent presentation of re-using existing structures and re-working them to be more efficient. As the owner of an old (1938) house in Michigan, I heartily support the movement away from the McMansion.

My only concern was that the people who remodeled the place clearly had money, from the tile in the bathroom, to the corian or granite counters, to the lap sink, to the woodwork, to the custom fixtures, this clearly was not a cheap project. Folks who see the site may not feel that they can afford doing such changes and hence be turned off by it. A better example would have been a house re-modeled on a bit less of a budget.
posted by CoolHandPuke at 5:39 AM on December 14, 2002

hey. good comments. i spent an hour on site last night and felt like i had only seen half of it.... impressive build. id like to see a project site explaining the methodology and story boards they used for site itself. that said. i grew up on the northshore of minnesota and tromped around tofte growing up. since then behemoth "cabins" with giant swaths cut through the treelines on the shore have become the norm. i hope this site/project, though obviously expensive - can become an example of what those who can afford lake shore property can do with it instead of gigantic - non-earth friendly dwellings.
posted by specialk420 at 9:11 AM on December 14, 2002

Outstanding link, specialK, thanks.

I spent about 45 minutes on it just now, but didn't run across any cost data on the actual building. Was that there someplace and I just missed it?
posted by yoga at 9:50 AM on December 14, 2002

China's CO2 emissions has actually been reduced by 17 percent since 1997, while it's economy has grown by 35 percent.

Probably not worth mentioning, but there is one giant Chinese emmission that the study overlooked.
posted by hama7 at 5:28 PM on December 14, 2002