this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2026
11 points (100.0% liked)

Australia

4977 readers
124 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
lodion@aussie.zone
bestusername@aussie.zone
eatham@aussie.zone
Nath@aussie.zone
11
Rotating home owners boast of 360-degree views and energy benefits (www.abc.net.au)
submitted 1 month ago by zero_gravitas@aussie.zone to c/australia@aussie.zone
5 comments fedilink hide all child comments
all 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Mr Everingham said being able to position the house to capture or avoid the sun or breeze saved an estimated 50 per cent in energy costs.

They keep saying that, but logically it doesn't make sense...

With energy efficient windows, you're not getting much free heat/cooling even if you were constantly rotating for optimal position.

And with the $350k price tag, even with 50% savings you'd have to reach 350k paid just to break even.

This is a rich person's waste of money and they're back rationalizing why the waste of resources is worth it.

[–] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

True, though if you have the money to spend on expensive superfluities, building something novel and cool is arguably a better use of it than just spending it on luxury goods.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

building something novel and cool is arguably a better use of it than just spending it on luxury goods.

Actually the opposite.

Taking up contractors time on this stuff means less making affordable housing which makes housing less affordable for everyone else.

In general.its happening to our entire economies. Only the wealthiest can afford things, so man hours and resources go into a small amount of luxury products rather than what the masses need.

Raising the prices at all.price points.

This is worse than normal.lixuryngoods, because it doesn't matter what jewelers spend their time on, we all need housing. And that's not even getting into the larger the single price tag the bigger the problem.

Like, there's a whole bunch of reasons this is horrible, even if I'm not explaining them all at once.

[–] Longmactoppedup@aussie.zone 5 points 1 month ago

They didn't even explain which method of services connection they went for. Affixed portion of house in middle or the fancy coupling method?

From an energy use perspective I'm certain that 350k would have been far better spent on passivhous certification than this.