Cheap energy and mortgage pressure defeated energy-efficient postwar housing design

Evidence

The obstacles to energy efficiency in the 1950s and 1960s were tremendous. The postwar housing industry was driven by the demand to produce as cheaply as possible: For both builders and buyers of homes, the mortgage payment was the critical concern, not the cost of utilities. By the early 1950s, the price of energy had reached all-time lows, so the economic argument for conservation lost force. The postwar economic boom brought the first taste of affluence to millions of Americans, and the conservation ideal soon ran up against a powerful desire to enjoy pleasures that once seemed extravagant or simply inconceivable for working-class families. — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside, 214

Categorization

• recurring: this claim recurs 2 times within its source
• XREF: connects to: Mass-production homebuilding homogenized house design and spiked energy use nationwide — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside:…, 34; Environmental criticism of postwar housing began by 1950 but went largely unheard — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside:…, 157; Postwar building techniques raised household energy demand by design choices — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside:…, 243 (+8 more)

Broader Connections

• Cheap energy and 1950s consumer culture defeated the conservation ideal #corroborates (0.90) — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside, 246
• Energy-efficient housing priced itself out of reach of budget-conscious buyers #corroborates (0.85) — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside, 245
• Postwar building techniques raised household energy demand by design choices #corroborates (0.82) — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside, 243
• Tract housing’s design deficiencies directly generated residential energy demand #corroborates (0.80) — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside, 264
• Postwar modernist building choices were driven by cost and technology, not style ideology #corroborates (0.75) — David Harvey, The Condition of Postmodernity, 468