Jeff Flowers on July 30, 2014 24 Comments Click on Infographic to view larger version. Embed This Infographic: <a href="https://learn.compactappliance.com/small-living-infographic/"><img decoding="async" src="https://learncompact.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/compact_living_infographic_550.jpg" alt="Compact Living Infographic - Why Small Living Might Be A Better For You" border="0" /></a><br />Infographic via: <a href="https://learn.compactappliance.com/lifestyle/small-living/">CompactAppliance.com</a> Here at Compact Appliance, we know a thing or two about small living. From creating storage solutions to selecting the right appliances, we are all experts on living in a small space. We created the above Infographic to help give you, the reader, a better idea of just how easy it is to live in a tiny home or small space, as well as highlight the many benefits of doing so. More On Small Living: Shop for Appliances Designed for Tiny Homes 4 Fireplaces for Small Living Spaces 6 Feng Shui Tips For Small Living Spaces 8 Tips for Maximizing Space in a Small Bathroom 10 Tips For Choosing Paint Colors for Small Living Spaces
Erik Goodwin says August 6, 2014 at 6:43 am I have to assume that you are an anti microwave person, to suggest they take up too much space is ludicrous. They are quite often used as a range hood as well as a microwave, and save both time, money and energy. I also have to imagine, based on your observation, that the microwave space is being wasted, that you need to get rid of the coffee machine, toaster, and every other countertop appliance. Why don’t we just do away with all kitchen cooking and get a grill for outdoors. Reply
Alicea Artuso says August 6, 2014 at 10:00 am Microwaving food may seem like a good idea, but if you do a little research you’ll find some alarming details. First off, it changes the molecular structure of the food and basically zaps the food of any nutrients…leaving you with zero life force in your food. Isn’t the food we eat suppose to nourish our bodies? Also, when you turn on your microwave, you are supposed to be standing at least 6 feet away from it…otherwise you are exposed to the radiation it transmits (kinda hard to do in a tiny house I presume). We have not used a microwave in our household in over 10 years. This was after my daughter did a science experiment using water from different sources to grow beans. The microwaved water wouldn’t sprout a single bean in multiple pots! That tells ya something. That’s all it took for us to look at other alternatives. Not to mention all the plastic we used to use for those microwave meals leeching into the food you’re eating…the worst! There are great small convection ovens on the market that work really well as an alternative. We have one from Sharper Image that we use all the time and it even has expander rings for more room. We love it so much that we opt to use it versus using our oven that I’m sure using far move energy (and can really heat up your house in the summer time). If we ever go tiny, I don’t think we would even miss a stove. I’d be happy we just my tiny convection oven. 😉 Reply
Kevin says August 6, 2014 at 11:55 am I once shared your concerns about microwaves, but the issues you raise have been thoroughly debunked (e.g., http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/21/health/upwave-microwaving-food/ and http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/10/health/10real.html). I still prefer to steam my veggies, and with my induction rangetop it’s as fast as microwaving, but I no longer worry about using the microwave to heat my oatmeal or leftovers. The key is, as with any cooking method, to not overcook the food. Oh, if you change the molecular structure of water, it isn’t water anymore. Microwaved water is still water, and will grow plants just fine (http://www.snopes.com/science/microwave/plants.asp). Reply
Jean Harville says September 5, 2016 at 8:18 am Thanks for your info about the microwave and the convection oven. Reply
Charles Dunning says August 6, 2014 at 10:26 am When you begin to compare 830, 1100 plus & 1500 sq ft houses with tiny houses I think you begin to miss the point. These are little houses & maybe medium-size houses. I don’t think they qualify as ‘tiny’. Many people live in less & don’t think or realize they are part of a new experiment in living structures. My wife & I plus at least 2 cats & 2 large dogs lived in a less than 800 sq ft house in central Florida for almost 10 years. Now & again grown children & their growing families camped with us. Though often crowded, I never felt I was living in a tiny house. Maybe definitions are required. Reply
mendozamrs says October 11, 2014 at 10:38 pm I agree. I’ve been living in 980 sq ft for the last 3 years and I feel like this place is big. Our other apartments all had less bedrooms and far less space, so maybe I was conditioned that way due to my circumstances but I think anything 900+ sq ft doesn’t qualify at “tiny”. Reply
Kren Wales says August 6, 2014 at 12:33 pm I LOVE the graphic! Does it come as a poster? If so, I’d like to buy one to hang in my cube/office at Architecture school. Reply
Valerie says August 6, 2014 at 2:57 pm Loved the graphics. To me, Tiny Living, is homes smaller than we grew up in in the 50’s, so unless a house is under 750 sq. ft. it doesn’t constitute a Tiny Home. A home larger than that just makes me think of a downsized home for people who live in McMansions. I enjoy the statistics and how they were presented. I will look at some of the links later. Thanks for the info, can never get enough. I have a 1200 sq ft home presently with 4 adults in it. I am downsizing to less than 400 sq ft by next year, by myself. Reply
Michael says August 18, 2014 at 11:36 am From someone who has studied architecture and “green” design, smaller is typically better for the environment plus experience and function of space. However, when dealing with environmental concerns, the best way to reduce impact on the environment is to stay away from it. Deciding to live in dense urban settings (which preexist) would reduce the environmental impact and carbon footprint when compared to building a small residence in a rural setting. We could also discuss transportation to get groceries, going to work/school, etc. Living in a rural or suburban setting typical means use of a vehicle, increasing environmental impact and carbon footprint. The best way to go “green” is location. Reply
Job Day says November 7, 2014 at 9:34 am My wife and I raised our 2 children in 1152 sq.ft. they have moved on and we haven’t been able to access the second floor for the last 5, so only living in 768 now. My Inlaws live in 1320 and are at the point that they need help now. They no longer drive so the 4 of us are moving into a 1930’s 950 sq.ft. single story on a bus route, plus the bank, grocer, doctor, vet, pharmacy all within a 3/4 mile walking distance of the house. Instead of the 3-10 miles we drive now. This seems to me to be the way to reduce your carbon footprint. Best of all, no snow! To me it’s not just the size of your house footprint but the size of your overall footprint that matters. A small house built new in the middle of nowhere on fresh ground is a waste when there are so many good houses in need of TLC sitting neglected in this country now. Reply
Elizabeth says May 7, 2015 at 5:19 pm We raised 4children in a 1000 sq ft. Home 3 bed rooms, and dare I say 1 and 1/2 bath. Oh boy we did do some major moving in the mornings. But we did it. Dinners were fun and always at the table and we always had company. Our home wasn’t small until some one said something. Reply
Emme says June 14, 2015 at 7:58 pm Awesome post! The impact on the environment due to use of resources and carbon footprint can be decreased so easily by small living. I love your tips for living small including multi-functional furniture and mirrors. Keep inspiring! – Emme @ Green Global Travel Reply
Ben Bendit says November 6, 2015 at 8:14 pm I’ve been renting for 30 years I would love to invest in a tiny house Instead of renting if anyway possible ? Reply
Bob Clauss says April 12, 2016 at 10:09 pm Stop eating, drinking and catting around. Save all your money. Bank your bucks . Save 52,000 for a Ford 350. Buy a 28 foot for another $50,000. Welcome to tiny living. If you have been renting for 30 years you are probably in your 50’s. Practice sleeping in the fetal position Reply
Chuck says November 10, 2015 at 4:07 pm Tiny houses are for poor people. Why have less when you could have more? If you were skid row and were gifted a tiny house you would be grateful but most of us are not skid row Reply
Tanya Elsworth / Ginger Snapp says January 11, 2016 at 7:31 pm I had a big house when I was a family of 4, we bought a 2 unit and converted it back into a single family, it was built in 1914 and we learned we went way too far out of our league and our comfort zone. When my family broke up for good reasons, the house was too big… so I left it… moved 900 miles away… we went from 1,780 square feet to 30 square feet, and let me tell you how happy we ended up. It was a wonderful challenge and we had a blast. Thinking outside the box was great for us, and I look forward to living small once again. Reply
Your Daddy says February 27, 2016 at 1:22 pm Smaller isn’t better you haven’t actually tried to live in a “tiny” house or apartment it’s a very painful experience. Reply
Gabe says May 17, 2016 at 5:33 pm What I would and WILL do. Is get 1 or 2 convection stove top things, a small micro/convection oven thing, a pod coffee cup thing and a toaster oven and a good size fridge for my eventual tiny house kitchen…a grill for outdoor cooking & maybe a washer/dryer combo thing…that will be a great kitchen. But I wouldn’t thing you have to get rid of a microwave entirely Reply
Gabe says May 17, 2016 at 5:36 pm No chuck….most of us are trying to keep up with the J Es family. And that is why we got into the housing predicament a few years ago. Do some research, quite a few affluent people live small as aposed to small minded. G Reply
G says October 9, 2016 at 7:03 am The book _Life at Home in the 21st Century_ studied the usage of home space by middle class families in Los Angeles. In a typical case, most activity occurred in the eat-in kitchen and family room: the large living & dining rooms that took up half of the downstairs, were rarely used (“entertaining on a grand scale” is a silly notion given the cost of the space for it). The space that was actually used regularly amounted to about 500 square feet: the upper end of “micro house” design. . The obvious lesson is, you can have a perfectly happy lifestyle without all that wasted space, and save energy & money doing it. The essentials of a house are spaces for sleeping, eating, and hygiene: to that, add the family room, the home office, and some storage. . As for kitchens, a 4-burner stove and huge oven are more wasted space: a 2-burner stove and a microwave/convection oven are more than sufficient. However, a larger fridge/freezer is more energy-efficient than a tiny one, and enables making fewer trips to the store for fresh & frozen foods. The clothes washer can go under the counter as it does in Europe, and a “countertop” dishwasher can be built-into the space under the counter as well. . Considering the difference between “large space, large mortgage, high energy consumption, high running costs” and “smaller space, smaller mortgage, low energy consumption, low running costs,” the choice is obvious. Reply
Shirley says October 18, 2016 at 4:11 pm I think the tiny house does apply, Yes, people live in small ones, same size as these. But overall the trend has been bigger and bigger! Besides why do we have to be so picky. It’s a tiny home! Reply
Linda Powell says September 5, 2017 at 12:05 pm Considering building a tiny house for myself. All my children are grown and on their own. Don’t need all the space. Need any advice from u Guys. Reply
