Could efficient homes save the U.S. housing market from an Asian takeover?
First off, let's be clear. I'm not fear mongering, my point isn't to scare people. But the doomsday scenario of China's taking over the U.S. housing industry the same way Asia took over the U.S. auto industry was a driving factor behind Parr Lumber's development of a building science-based efficient home product.
In case you missed it, I discussed the product (and Asian threat, real or not) in an article last Thursday here.
The product is called the Parr High Performance System. Parr takes an architect's plans, tweaks them, builds pieces of a house's frame at a climate controlled plant and assembles the building's envelope on site. It's quick, easy and they say more efficient.
Parr says it reduces energy bills, reduces job site lumber waste by 75 percent, shortens the construction schedule, and provides cleaner air and consistent room temperature.
Oh, by the way, Toyota Housing Services has already entered the housing market in San Antonio, Texas.
Apparently, Toyota has been in the housing business since the 1970s. For more information on what the Japanese modular homes look like, see below or click here.
Nate Bond, director of sales at Parr, says houses have been built the same way since the stud frame home was invented in the 1800s. He says something needs to change to keep American homes competitive and efficient. If Asia brings a great, cheap, modular house to the mass American market, he said, “They would take over the U.S. housing market without firing a shot.” What do you think? Is he right?
If he is right, could efficient easy homes be the answer?
For an overview of the housing market from a mortgage planning perspective, check out this post called Brian's Blog O-Parr-Tunity here.
For more on the Parr product, where the idea came from, how it works and building science, read my story in the DJC here.

July 16th, 2008 - 21:23
I read similar article also named Could efficient homes save the U.S. housing market from an Asian takeover?, and it was completely different. Personally, I agree with you more, because this article makes a little bit more sense for me