• ☂️-@lemmy.ml
    71·
    3 days ago

    i don’t think their intention is to keep them empty. not the worst thing to spend co2 on.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      1·
      3 days ago

      It wasn’t even necessarily a bad idea given property growth, but it will be interesting to see what happens if they can’t stop population decline

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.worldEnglish
      22·
      3 days ago

      Their intention was to bolster the economy with busy work, but that’s not a long term solution.

      • ☂️-@lemmy.ml
        61·
        3 days ago

        busywork making houses ahead of time is pretty good tbh.

        id take that over ai or some shit.

        • Duamerthrax@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3·
          3 days ago

          That’s comparing Apples to Shampoo. To completely different concepts and it’s not an either/or situation.

          • ☂️-@lemmy.ml
            51·
            3 days ago

            it really isn’t. both give out emissions, one of them is housing.

            its like complaining wind farms are ugly.

            • Duamerthrax@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1·
              3 days ago

              Concrete doesn’t house CO2. When they created Biodome2, the engineers didn’t factor in the curing time and CO2 output and the scientists had to vent the facility or suffocate.

        • Bytemeister@lemmy.worldEnglish
          22·
          3 days ago

          Houses don’t stand long on their own. It takes a significant amount of time and money to keep these things from filling up with mold or collapsing.