[Sixstrings]

The American McMansion has met its match. A new study reports that Australians now live in the world's largest homes, overtaking the U.S in the rankings.

The study, commissioned by the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, found that the average Australian house had grown by 10 percent in the past decade to 214.6 square meters (2,310 sq ft), Reuters reports.

This compares with the average size of new homes in America, which shrank to 201.5 square meters (2,169 sq ft), down from 212 square meters (2,282 sq ft). This was the first decrease in America in a decade and was a result of the recession, most reports noted.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/30/australians-have-the-worl_n_374251.html?slidenumber=pulBVEGfrdM%3D

I found this interesting.. as much as we hear about the overly-large American McMansions, it turns out that Oz is now the most ostentatious nation on the planet.

[3aidlillahi]

Just because they are being built larger, doesn't mean that they are less sustainable. Perhaps they are larger because they are building them more vertically, thus not expanding suburbia. In the US, it's largely done by taking over prime farm land and wooded areas, destroying natural habitats. Even a decrease in the average size of the home doesn't necessarily mean that we're becoming more sustainable in our housing practices.

[emersonbiggins]

True enough, 3, but from what little I can gather about Australians, it seems they've adopted a hyperbolic form of manifest destiny. It's evident in the size of their houses, the sizes of the engines in their cars/utes, and the layout of their metropolises (although, on the whole, Austrailian cities proper seem more cosmopolitan/urban than the US).

[yeahbut]

Aussies have just overtaken Americans as the world's biggest per capita C02 emitters as well. Lucky those emails came out and C02 isn't a greenhouse gas anymore- phew!

[turner]

Just because they are being built larger, doesn't mean that they are less sustainable. Perhaps they are larger because they are building them more vertically, thus not expanding suburbia. In the US, it's largely done by taking over prime farm land and wooded areas, destroying natural habitats. Even a decrease in the average size of the home doesn't necessarily mean that we're becoming more sustainable in our housing practices.

It's true that they are building bigger houses but this is actually being done on much smaller blocks of land than in the past. There is some recognition of trying to incorporate good practices in the design but generally they have air-conditioning and all the bells and whistles. There is expansion of the city limits and unfortunately little in the way of transport infrastructure accompanies these estates thus forcing many more cars on the road. They travel longer distances causing pollution and traffic chaos.