> e.g., you can realistically restore a stone farmhouse that's gone to ruin more easily than a stick+drywall house that has), no? My sense is that the 500-year TCO is many times higher (maybe as much as an order of magnitude) for US-style homes.

No, labor for masonry related work is insanely expensive, and rightfully so. Even at its most basic, more mass needs more force to move around.

It is so cheap and easy to cut some wood and drywall and install new things and patch it up rather than deal with masonry that will last 500 years.

You could also argue that this type of construction allows more room for generational upgrades than those expected to last 500 years.

Integrating PV solar into the roof might be a more reasonable proposition if you know you're planning to replace the roof in a few years. If you don't expect to have to replace it for several more decades, you're less likely to make that investment.

This also applies to insulation, air sealing, electrical upgrades, etc.