I moved from a 1,600 square foot total house (including basement) to a 6,1000 square foot total house (including basement.

I really did not buy any more furniture at all. Only difference the crap I had jammed in my small attic with a hole in the ceiling you climb into, by one car garage jammed with stuff and my 10x10 shed jammed with stuff are now out in the open. I dont need a shed, dont have anything in my unheated attic and my garage is not jammed packed.

Plus my kids dont have to share rooms.

I live in a bigger house I need. Even bigger than I wanted, but it was what we could get during the insane housing market. I do love the space, though. We do not use all the house every day, but we do use all the house... especially with people working from home, covid quarantines, using a home gym... the list goes on.

I will not make excuses about waste and pollution, but can say that I use about 1/3 as much energy in this huge, new house as I did when I lived in a much older house half the size. Windows, insulation, and new appliances really do matter.

We're a family of 3 in about 3800 sq ft. Use basically everything regularly, with the rec room in basement getting less traction because we generally all hang out together in the evenings and prefer the backyard and main level.

We picked the house because the bedrooms were smaller than the communal living spaces, and it has worked out well.

Anonymous wrote:we live in an 8000 sf house but we offset our footprint w/ teslas and credits so no shame here.

New Tesla’s district the earths rare minerals. Wreck the rain forest and used batteries poison the soil

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my searches in Arlington, there is often not that much of a price difference between well maintained, older 3-4 bedroom houses with 2500 sq ft (often around $1.5-$1.7 million) and relatively new McMansions with 5-6 bedrooms with 4000-5000 sq ft (often around $1.8-$2.0 million). So it can make lots of sense to just go for the bigger house, even if you don't really need the extra space.

Lots of sense how? You need to heat, cool, and maintain twice as much house. You have to furnish twice as much house. Why would you do that if you didn't actually really want more space?

I mean it's one thing if you want more space, many people do for many reasons. But I would never be like "oh I don't need more space but why not, I'll buy a house twice as large because the price is the same anyways". Like, even if they tell you you get a free second entree with the purchase of one entree, it doesn't mean it's always the best idea to just eat them both.

You should always get the second free entree and take it home for leftovers for the next day.

Well I can’t cut the too-large house in half and use the other half for my next life so

we live in an 8000 sf house but we offset our footprint w/ teslas and credits so no shame here.

Anonymous wrote:If you want to reduce consumption, how often do you change cars? How much wardrobe items do you buy each year? How many plastic toys do your kids have? How often do you update the decor in your house?

Stop buying stuff and try to only buy sustainably manufactured products.

This is my first post in this thread.
Family of 6 (2 parents and 4 kids) in a 2800 sqf house (includes finished basement.) Currently our older two have moved out (college) but we have lived here for 16 years--so the majority of the time it's been all six of us here.

Cars: My current car is a 2013 model (given to us by an elderly relative that no longer drives--prior to that I had a 2012 minivan. Spouse drives a 2010 model vehicle--purchased new in 2010.

Wardrobe: minimal. I buy maybe 2-3 pairs of pants, a a half dozen tops, and maybe 3-4 dresses each season. I've had the same winter coat for 3 years.

Plastic toys: Kids are too old but when they were younger it was almost all wooden toys--and not Melissa and Doug. Most of the toys we bought our kids were from smaller family owned companies. One of my favorite companies is https://elvesandangels.com/ and I've often posted this as a recommendation when people are asking about toy kitchens.

Update decor: Like I said earlier, we've lived in this house for 16 years--we didn't update ANYTHING until 2020, when everyone else was doing home projects. We repainted the whole interior and got some new window treatments. Our current bedroom set is one we bought in 2004. We bought our family room sofa in 2020, but the one we had prior to that was purchased in 2008, and the one prior to that was purchased in 1998.

If you want to reduce consumption, how often do you change cars? How much wardrobe items do you buy each year? How many plastic toys do your kids have? How often do you update the decor in your house?

Stop buying stuff and try to only buy sustainably manufactured products.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of y'all don't have in-laws living with you and it shows. I thought multi-generational living is supposed to be the future of the Millennials! You're going to do that in 2000-2500 sq ft and two bathrooms? With kids, too? Have fun and good luck.

*whispers*


some of us did it in small houses growing up

Yeah but who wants to live like that now? Yuck.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my experience, most people who care about the environmental effects of consumption don't maintain consistent views. For example, I rarely eat out and generate very little trash; but a friend who cares about "consumption" orders takeout a lot, and the waste from takeout is enormous. Also, I admittedly have an old vehicle that is not fuel efficient, but I drive about 3000 miles per year. Meanwhile, I know people who care about "consumption" who drive 12K-15K miles per year in their more fuel efficient vehicles.

You are right a lot of people who claim to care about the environment consistently make personal choices that are counter to this, all while shaming others for not recycling hard enough or something. I know lots of UMC "progressives" who make a show out of stuff like carrying around their own metal straws and driving an electric vehicle, but travel extensively, live in huge homes, doing endless takeout, etc.

BUT there actually are some of us who are not just environmentalists for show. We just tend not to be as showy about it because it's not about proving we're the right kind of people, it's about actually trying to decrease our environmental impact.

If you are an environmentalist, though, you already know that individual action can never be more than a drop in the bucket. Slowing climate change, pollution, the water crisis, etc. can only happen through widescale government action directed primarily at businesses. I say this not to justify wasteful behavior by individuals, but because harping on individual behavior is a distraction from real solutions.

If you study environmental policy you'll see that the whole idea of individual action was created by polluting industries as a way of deflecting responsibility onto the choices of consumers rather than producers.

I love this post and the one being replied to. Very astute observations that I had never before considered.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my experience, most people who care about the environmental effects of consumption don't maintain consistent views. For example, I rarely eat out and generate very little trash; but a friend who cares about "consumption" orders takeout a lot, and the waste from takeout is enormous. Also, I admittedly have an old vehicle that is not fuel efficient, but I drive about 3000 miles per year. Meanwhile, I know people who care about "consumption" who drive 12K-15K miles per year in their more fuel efficient vehicles.

You are right a lot of people who claim to care about the environment consistently make personal choices that are counter to this, all while shaming others for not recycling hard enough or something. I know lots of UMC "progressives" who make a show out of stuff like carrying around their own metal straws and driving an electric vehicle, but travel extensively, live in huge homes, doing endless takeout, etc.

BUT there actually are some of us who are not just environmentalists for show. We just tend not to be as showy about it because it's not about proving we're the right kind of people, it's about actually trying to decrease our environmental impact.

If you are an environmentalist, though, you already know that individual action can never be more than a drop in the bucket. Slowing climate change, pollution, the water crisis, etc. can only happen through widescale government action directed primarily at businesses. I say this not to justify wasteful behavior by individuals, but because harping on individual behavior is a distraction from real solutions.

If you study environmental policy you'll see that the whole idea of individual action was created by polluting industries as a way of deflecting responsibility onto the choices of consumers rather than producers.

+2. Harping on the relatively small number of people that live in big houses is an unhelpful distraction.

Anonymous wrote:I have read numerous studies that smaller homes (not teeny, but 'normal size') make for closer families. The studies I read about this mentioned the number of daily interactions/forced passings in the home. You engage in more conversations, interactions, etc. People aren't in the separate wing of the home of in their gigantic bath-in suite kid bedroom. From what I've seen IRL, there is a lot of truth to this.

I think there is truth to that as it seems like ours family is but even if we had the space I think we'd be equally close.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America is crazy, people think they need a separate room for everything. Gym, office, TV room, playroom, sitting room, etc. God forbid you have a guest stay in your office room! Or a desk in your playroom! I prefer smaller, older houses but I know I'm in the minority.

We have a 900 square foot house. The office due to work/school at home is completely filled with desks/computers. Where would we put a guest? There is no space in our bedroom for an air mattress for our kid either as it only holds a bed, nightstands and a dresser with a tiny bit of space in-between.

If you have a 900sf house I don't think you are an example of what PP is talking about...?

That's exactly WHY I'd want a 4000+ square foot house. I'd like each of us to have an office, the kid to have an office/music room, guest room, formal living room, formal dining room, family room, workshop...we could easily make use of it all but I don't want to clean it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my experience, most people who care about the environmental effects of consumption don't maintain consistent views. For example, I rarely eat out and generate very little trash; but a friend who cares about "consumption" orders takeout a lot, and the waste from takeout is enormous. Also, I admittedly have an old vehicle that is not fuel efficient, but I drive about 3000 miles per year. Meanwhile, I know people who care about "consumption" who drive 12K-15K miles per year in their more fuel efficient vehicles.

You are right a lot of people who claim to care about the environment consistently make personal choices that are counter to this, all while shaming others for not recycling hard enough or something. I know lots of UMC "progressives" who make a show out of stuff like carrying around their own metal straws and driving an electric vehicle, but travel extensively, live in huge homes, doing endless takeout, etc.

BUT there actually are some of us who are not just environmentalists for show. We just tend not to be as showy about it because it's not about proving we're the right kind of people, it's about actually trying to decrease our environmental impact.

If you are an environmentalist, though, you already know that individual action can never be more than a drop in the bucket. Slowing climate change, pollution, the water crisis, etc. can only happen through widescale government action directed primarily at businesses. I say this not to justify wasteful behavior by individuals, but because harping on individual behavior is a distraction from real solutions.

If you study environmental policy you'll see that the whole idea of individual action was created by polluting industries as a way of deflecting responsibility onto the choices of consumers rather than producers.

Anonymous wrote:A lot of y'all don't have in-laws living with you and it shows. I thought multi-generational living is supposed to be the future of the Millennials! You're going to do that in 2000-2500 sq ft and two bathrooms? With kids, too? Have fun and good luck.

*whispers*


some of us did it in small houses growing up