Wooden buildings have the advantage that in an active seismic area they can survive (or let the occupants survive) earthquakes much better than brick. Building codes in California prefer wood pretty much for this reason, even though they are more susceptible to fire. Fires can be controlled, versus having every masonry house in a city fall down simultaneously.

Fires can be controlled, however those looking at ashes year after year question that. Brick homes can be made earthquake proof, up to a point. Lots of concrete and rebar (it can rust) http://www.understandconstruction.com/concrete-frame-structu...

Obviously it's a science and you can't be cheap with cement or rebar. A lot of them went kaput in Iran and Turkey...did not follow code.

A major drawback is that utilities (water, heating, electricity etc ) must be build in. There's no just replacing some sheetrock. But encased pvc probably lasts 100+ years.

There are some brick buildings in the Mediterranean which are seismically resistant. Italy, the birthplace of concrete, is seismically active after all:

https://clay-wienerberger.com/expertise/brick-buildings-for-...

I'm curious as to whether wood-over-brick could allow taller structures than wood or brick alone. Building cheaply in the 50-85 foot range (high-rise regulations kick in above a floor height of 75 feet) is an important challenge going forward and hard to do with wood alone.

It turns out concrete and brick have completely different, almost polar opposite, seismic properties. Here in CA, concrete is what you want a foundation to be made from. We learned the hard way that brick foundations are prone to crumbling.

Brick is certainly strong up to a point, but when it fails, it fails spectacularly.

The latest changes to the international building code include some rules allowing masonry under wood, which is why there's an explosion of midrise apartment buildings in my area at least.

Surely the framing of a home is a very minor part of the total cost of construction at this point in time. My brother is a carpenter and formerly did mostly framing, and it wasn't a terribly high-paid job. He makes a lot more now doing concrete on commercial sites.

All of this is to say that I'm sure yes, I'm sure automation could reduce costs there, but likely the amount of money invested in R&D and then the machines itself wouldn't be worth it to these companies.

I live in an old (1896) house constructed with douglas fir and redwood that is thousands of years old and incredibly dense - it's hard to pound a nail into it. Today's houses are framed with wood that is very 'green', soft and flammable and cladding that is little more than thick cardboard with weathershield on one side.

It seems likely the next generations of materials will be even more ephemeral and designed for speed of construction...concrete seems to be the only material resistant to this, although older concrete is a lot more dense than the mixes we buy today....

If your house burns down, you get to buy another house. Capitalist wins coming and going.

Does any one know why are bricks expensive ? It is just dirt. right ?

Red bricks and other varieties are kiln fired, not unlike ceramics and glass.

Concrete cinder blocks are cured in a mold, as with all concrete.

Adobe is often sun-baked in desert climates, but it's not as practical in other climates.

Cobble stones are hewn from found or quarried rock. Not all rock can withstand all environments, based on frost action and other factors. Graveyards tend to regulate head stone selection for this reason.

So it all really depends on your brick selection, and what will work for where you are, and how much you want to spend.

It's clay, and wood is much more abundant in the US. However, in other places such as the UK, wood isn't abundant, so most houses are made of brick.

The UK has a particular problem with a fungus that attacks lumber, serpula lacrymans aka ‘dry rot’.

Related, we're throwing up so many new houses these days, that the UK brick industry can't keep up with demand:

https://www.theconstructionindex.co.uk/news/view/uk-brick-ma...

Transporting them is expensive because they're heavy and they're made far away from where the buildings are being built.

if it catches on, that will no longer be a problem.

dirt plus