Electric heat’s cheaper installation drew builders into energy-wasteful design.

Evidence

In part, the promoters of electric heat promised builders the opportunity to sell cheaper and better houses. Electric heating systems usually cost less than gas or oil burners. Installation was simpler: With experience, the power companies argued, a builder could cut installation time in half. In a house without air conditioning or with room cooling units, a builder also could eliminate the costly and time-consuming work of installing a duct system. Because the electrically heated house did not need a chimney or a furnace room, the builder could offer more usable space. To help builders incorporate the new technology, a majority of utilities even offered free design-and-layout services. In all, therefore, the builder of a home with electric heat could advertise more house for the money. — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside, 274

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Builders, not consumers, chose energy-wasteful electric heat for profit reasons — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside:…, 290; Air conditioning’s summer demand drove utilities to promote electric heat — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside:…, 265; Tract housing’s design deficiencies directly generated residential energy demand — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside:…, 264 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Cheap energy and mortgage pressure defeated energy-efficient postwar housing design #corroborates (0.85) — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside, 214
• Postwar building techniques raised household energy demand by design choices #expands (0.80) — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside, 243