The negatives of Earthships

I was recently diverted to a blog post regarding the "negatives" about Earthships.

http://www.archinia.com/about-us/publications/215-solving-the-earthship-enigma.html

It was bit unnerving to read, but something I really wanted to know. It seems like people build them and then live silently ever after.  Any post interviews are usually done with extreme eco lovers who have lower standards than most folks.

Rather than me guessing, I now have a list of possible pros and cons, problems and solutions.

Ultimately, Earthships aren't perfect and the default may not even be possible in certain climates.  They tend to do well in "ideal" climates where the temperature doesn't vary a lot, the humidity isn't extreme and it rains regularly.  Sounds like a normal house lol  So how does one make an Earthship work in an extreme climate?

Here were some of my thoughts on modifications for my own climate:

Location: 
They suggested to not build one in a cool climate at all.  And to especially not build in high humidity or low rain.

Well I live in Canada.  The temperature can go as low as -40C in the winter (usually -20C) and up to +30C in summer (usually low 20's).  Rain and humidity aren't really a problem for most of Canada.  But ice, snow and wind are a problem.

I'm assuming that they are meaning this statement for the basic/standard Earthship.  That makes sense.  All I need to do is plan some modifications.  I already assumed that it might be wise to have backup systems, such as underfloor heating or fireplace/stove.  

Orientation toward the south will be a given since I want passive thermal heating to be the main source when possible.

Siting:
My design already incorporated south entrances for a snowy climate, which fits their suggestions. I also like evergreens and trees, which make good wind breaks like they say.  That's common knowledge up here. I have no problem putting in trees!

For overheating, we only have maybe one or two weeks a year where it gets uncomfortably hot.  They suggest overhangs or leafy trees.  The problem is the possibility of interfering with the heating, which is a bigger problem overall. I think I may consider retractable awnings if heat is truly an issue.

Structure:
They suggest to skip the tires.  I checked into tireless rammed earth walls and either you do it yourself (I'm not incredibly skilled) or you hire someone.  Up here, contracting for rammed earth walls costs 20-30% more than a conventional house.  No thanks, this is expensive enough. I know I can do tires though.  So tires it will be.  The concern mainly seems to be off gassing, for which there is no clear answer. I will have to consult others.
Note: I've researched more on off gassing.  It still doesn't seem to be a problem, due to the fact that used tires had plenty of time to "off gas" while they were being used, and they are being packed in several inches of covering material.  In terms of skipping the tires, the alternatives such as cement bricks or rammed walls are incredibly expensive, as you will see in the later blog entries. There are ways to make the tire pounding easier, as well.

Design:
Points noted.  I plan on modifying my drawings and posting them later.  I will keep these things in mind, but I'm skipping the part on sleeping pods.

Windows and Doors:

The "no sloping window walls" is confusing.  I'm not sure what they are referring to.  The only sloping window wall I can think of is the one on the outside.  It helps with the passive heating design, so eliminating it could be detrimental to this far north.  Vertical is certainly nicer looking, but it doesn't allow in as much sun and is better for hot climates.

However, if they are referring to the problems with humidity and leakage on the slanting windows, the architect I'm hiring has already fixed those issues so.....no big deal.  He has also fixed issues with the roof "kick up" in a standard Earthship; by eliminating it.

I didn't realize the part about the closing off the greenhouse though.  I made my plans fairly open concept.  Therefore I guess I will have to ditch that and close the space off a bit.  Not a problem.  Note: I contacted the architect and he said that closing off the green house can pose problems with "egress" in the building code (google it).  He says they can get away with it in New Mexico, but it's a lot harder to do such a thing elsewhere, including Canada.  Therefore, I had to go back to the open concept again. 

I also don't plan on using exterior bottle walls, which can pose an insulation/cold problem.  I will just use them on the inside. But I love the idea of solatubes for the back rooms.