Refrigeration, a cornerstone of modern convenience and industry, relies heavily on the use of refrigerants-substances that absorb heat from the environment and provide cooling. Over time, the choice of refrigerants has evolved significantly, driven by both technological advancements and environmental considerations. Traditional refrigerants have been instrumental in shaping refrigeration technologies; however, their environmental impact has prompted a search for more sustainable alternatives.
Historically, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were widely used as refrigerants due to their excellent thermodynamic properties and low toxicity. HVAC warranties can save mobile home owners from unexpected repair costs mobile home hvac near me energy. However, it was discovered that CFCs were major contributors to ozone layer depletion-a critical shield protecting life on Earth from harmful ultraviolet radiation. This revelation led to international agreements like the Montreal Protocol in 1987, which aimed to phase out CFC production and consumption. As a result, hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) were introduced as transitional solutions with relatively lower ozone-depleting potential but still possessing significant global warming potential (GWP).
The environmental impact of traditional refrigerants extends beyond ozone depletion. Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), introduced as replacements for HCFCs, do not harm the ozone layer but contribute significantly to global warming due to their high GWP. The persistence of these compounds in the atmosphere exacerbates climate change challenges.
In response to these issues, there is an increasing emphasis on exploring refrigerant choices with lower environmental impacts. Natural refrigerants such as ammonia (NH3), carbon dioxide (CO2), and hydrocarbons are gaining attention for their minimal or negligible GWP and zero ozone-depleting potential. Ammonia is noted for its high efficiency but requires careful handling due to its toxicity. CO2 is appreciated for its non-flammability and low cost but operates at higher pressures than conventional systems.
Moreover, new synthetic alternatives like hydrofluoroolefins (HFOs) are being developed with substantially lower GWPs compared to HFCs while maintaining favorable safety profiles. These innovations represent significant steps forward in reducing refrigeration's environmental footprint.
Transitioning to these environmentally friendly options involves overcoming technical challenges related to system design and compatibility while ensuring safety standards are met. Additionally, regulatory frameworks play a crucial role in facilitating this shift by setting phasedown targets for high-GWP substances under agreements such as the Kigali Amendment.
In conclusion, while traditional refrigerants have played a vital role in supporting industrial growth and human comfort over decades, their environmental ramifications underscore an urgent need for sustainable alternatives. By embracing innovative solutions with lower environmental impacts-such as natural refrigerants and next-generation synthetics-the refrigeration industry can continue meeting societal needs while safeguarding our planet's delicate ecological balance.
In the pursuit of sustainability, selecting low-impact refrigerants for mobile homes has become a critical concern. Mobile homes, often used as affordable housing options or temporary accommodations, require efficient and eco-friendly refrigeration systems to minimize their environmental footprint. The challenge lies in balancing the need for effective cooling with environmental responsibility. This essay explores the criteria for choosing refrigerants that have a lesser impact on our planet while ensuring optimal performance in mobile homes.
The first criterion in selecting low-impact refrigerants is their Global Warming Potential (GWP). Refrigerants with high GWP contribute significantly to climate change when released into the atmosphere. Therefore, it is imperative to choose refrigerants with low GWP values, ideally those classified under natural refrigerants such as ammonia (NH3), carbon dioxide (CO2), or hydrocarbons like propane (C3H8) and isobutane (C4H10). These natural alternatives not only have minimal impact on global warming but also tend to be more energy-efficient.
Another crucial factor is the Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP). Traditional chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) are known for their harmful effects on the ozone layer. To address this issue, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) were developed as substitutes; however, many of them still possess high GWP values. Thus, transitioning towards hydrofluoroolefins (HFOs) or other non-ozone depleting substances can significantly reduce both ODP and GWP impacts.
Energy efficiency forms another pivotal aspect of this selection process. Mobile homes typically have limited space and resources for power generation; therefore, using energy-efficient refrigerants can lead to substantial savings in energy consumption and costs. Refrigerants that enable air conditioning units or refrigerators to operate efficiently at lower power levels not only conserve energy but also enhance the overall sustainability of mobile home living.
Safety is also paramount when considering refrigerant options. The flammability and toxicity levels of potential refrigerants must be evaluated carefully. For instance, while hydrocarbons offer low GWPs and zero ODPs, they are highly flammable and must be managed carefully within systems designed to mitigate these risks. Similarly, ammonia offers excellent efficiency but requires careful handling due to its toxicity.
Lastly, regulatory compliance must guide the selection process. Many countries are enacting stricter regulations around high-GWP refrigerants in response to international agreements like the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol. Ensuring that chosen refrigerants meet current legal standards not only prepares mobile home manufacturers for future policy changes but also aligns them with global efforts toward mitigating climate change.
In conclusion, selecting low-impact refrigerants for use in mobile homes involves a multi-faceted approach that considers environmental impact, energy efficiency, safety concerns, and regulatory compliance. As technology advances and awareness grows regarding sustainable practices in every sector of life-including housing-these criteria will continue to evolve and refine how we approach refrigeration needs responsibly within our living spaces. By prioritizing these factors today, we pave the way for a cleaner tomorrow where comfort does not come at an exorbitant cost to our planet's well-being.
In the quest to mitigate climate change and reduce global carbon emissions, the role of energy-efficient HVAC (Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning) systems has never been more pivotal.. These systems are ubiquitous in modern buildings, providing comfort in both residential and commercial settings.
Posted by on 2024-12-27
Diagnosing weak airflow in mobile home ducts can often be a challenging task for homeowners.. While some issues may be easily identified and rectified with basic troubleshooting, others persist despite repeated efforts to resolve them.
Posted by on 2024-12-27
Title: Case Studies: Successful Implementation of R410A Systems and Their Role in Eco-Conscious HVAC Choices In recent years, the push towards sustainable living has significantly influenced the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) industry.. Central to this transition is the choice of refrigerants that reduce environmental impact while maintaining operational efficiency.
Posted by on 2024-12-27
Managing frozen coils in mobile home air conditioning units can be a daunting task for any homeowner.. While minor issues can often be managed with a bit of DIY spirit, there are times when calling a professional HVAC technician becomes not just advisable but necessary.
Posted by on 2024-12-27
In recent years, the pressing need to address environmental concerns has led to significant advancements in the field of refrigeration, particularly within mobile HVAC systems. The conventional refrigerants that have long been used in these systems are increasingly being scrutinized for their high global warming potential (GWP) and ozone-depleting characteristics. In response, the exploration of alternative refrigerant options with a lower environmental impact has become a crucial topic for researchers and industry professionals alike.
Mobile HVAC systems, found in vehicles ranging from personal cars to large commercial trucks, play a vital role in climate control. However, traditional refrigerants like R-134a have been identified as major contributors to greenhouse gas emissions. This fact has driven regulatory bodies worldwide to impose stricter standards, prompting manufacturers to seek out more sustainable alternatives.
One promising category of alternative refrigerants is hydrofluoroolefins (HFOs), such as R-1234yf. HFOs possess significantly lower GWP compared to their predecessors while maintaining comparable efficiency levels in cooling performance. Their chemical structure allows them to break down more quickly in the atmosphere, reducing their long-term environmental impact. As such, HFOs have emerged as a leading contender for replacing older refrigerants in mobile applications.
Another avenue being explored is the use of natural refrigerants like carbon dioxide (CO2) and hydrocarbons such as propane (R-290). These substances offer minimal or zero GWP and do not contribute to ozone depletion. CO2-based systems present challenges due to high operating pressures but are lauded for their environmental benefits and energy efficiency under certain conditions. Meanwhile, hydrocarbons are flammable but can be safely utilized with appropriate system designs and safety measures.
The shift towards these alternatives does not come without its challenges. The transition requires significant re-engineering of existing HVAC systems to accommodate new chemical properties and safety standards. Additionally, there is a need for widespread training among technicians to handle these newer substances safely and effectively.
Despite these hurdles, the push towards environmentally friendly refrigerants reflects an essential evolution in our approach to sustainability within the automotive industry. By investing in research and development of low-impact alternatives today, we pave the way for cleaner technologies that will reduce our carbon footprint tomorrow.
In conclusion, exploring refrigerant choices with lower environmental impact represents both a challenge and an opportunity for innovation within mobile HVAC systems. As we continue this journey towards greener solutions, collaboration between industry stakeholders will be pivotal in achieving meaningful progress that benefits both consumers and our planet's health.
As the global community becomes increasingly aware of the environmental impact of conventional refrigerants, there is a growing interest in exploring refrigerant choices that promise lower ecological footprints. Low-impact refrigerants are at the forefront of this movement, offering both benefits and challenges that must be carefully considered to strike a balance between environmental responsibility and practical application.
One of the primary benefits of implementing low-impact refrigerants is their reduced contribution to global warming. Traditional hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) have high Global Warming Potential (GWP), meaning they can trap more heat in the atmosphere compared to carbon dioxide. In contrast, low-impact options such as hydrocarbons, ammonia, and carbon dioxide itself have significantly lower GWP ratings. This reduction directly supports international efforts to combat climate change by minimizing one of its contributing factors.
Additionally, many low-impact refrigerants boast improved energy efficiency. For instance, using natural refrigerants like ammonia can lead to enhanced system performance due to its superior thermodynamic properties. Improved energy efficiency translates into lower operational costs for businesses and households alike, providing an economic incentive alongside environmental benefits.
However, transitioning to low-impact refrigerants is not without its challenges. One major obstacle is the need for updated infrastructure and equipment. Many current refrigeration systems are designed with traditional HFCs in mind, necessitating significant modifications or complete overhauls to accommodate new substances safely and effectively. This transition can be costly and time-consuming for businesses that rely heavily on refrigeration technology.
Moreover, safety concerns present another challenge when adopting certain low-impact alternatives. For example, while hydrocarbons offer a promising eco-friendly option due to their negligible GWP, they are also flammable. Ensuring safe usage requires stringent regulations and robust safety measures during installation and operation-factors that can complicate widespread adoption.
Training and education are also crucial when it comes to implementing these newer technologies. Technicians accustomed to working with traditional refrigerants might need additional training to handle low-impact alternatives properly-a step necessary to prevent accidents and ensure optimal system performance.
In summary, while the implementation of low-impact refrigerants offers undeniable environmental benefits by reducing contributions to global warming and enhancing energy efficiency, it also presents technical and logistical challenges that must be addressed thoughtfully. Balancing these pros and cons requires collaboration across industries-engineers developing safer systems, policymakers crafting supportive regulations, businesses investing in new infrastructure-and a commitment from all stakeholders towards a sustainable future. Embracing these new technologies represents a critical step forward in mitigating climate change impacts while meeting our cooling needs responsibly.
In recent years, the global push towards sustainability has catalyzed a re-evaluation of numerous industrial practices, including the refrigeration systems employed in mobile homes. As society becomes increasingly aware of environmental issues such as climate change and ozone depletion, the need for eco-friendly refrigerants has never been more pressing. This essay delves into case studies that highlight successful integration of these environmentally conscious choices, underscoring their potential to revolutionize the mobile home industry.
Mobile homes provide a unique challenge when it comes to choosing refrigerants due to their compact size and mobility requirements. Traditional refrigerants have been known to contribute significantly to global warming and ozone layer damage, primarily through their high Global Warming Potential (GWP) and Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP). However, innovative companies are now exploring alternatives with lower environmental impact while maintaining efficiency and reliability.
One notable case study involves a collaboration between a leading mobile home manufacturer and an environmental technology firm. This partnership focused on replacing conventional hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) with hydrocarbons like propane (R-290), which boasts a significantly lower GWP. Despite initial concerns regarding flammability, rigorous safety measures were implemented, including enhanced leak detection systems and improved ventilation designs within the units. The outcome was not only an environmentally friendly product but also one that achieved superior cooling performance at reduced energy costs.
Another exemplary case is that of a European firm that integrated carbon dioxide (CO2 or R-744) as a refrigerant in its line of luxury mobile homes. Known for its non-flammable nature and minimal environmental impact, CO2 presented logistical challenges due to its need for higher operating pressures compared to traditional options. However, through engineering innovations such as reinforced piping systems and advanced pressure control mechanisms, this company successfully harnessed CO2's benefits without compromising safety or efficiency.
A third case study worth noting involves the use of ammonia (NH3) in larger mobile home models designed for extended family living. Ammonia is celebrated for its zero ODP and negligible GWP; however, toxicity concerns necessitated robust containment strategies alongside regular maintenance protocols to ensure occupant safety. The results were noteworthy: improved thermal regulation capabilities coupled with significant reductions in both refrigerant leakage rates and operating costs over time.
These case studies collectively demonstrate how eco-friendly refrigerants can be effectively integrated into mobile home designs without sacrificing performance or affordability. They also highlight the importance of innovation in overcoming technical challenges associated with alternative refrigerants-challenges that once seemed insurmountable but are now being addressed through collaboration between manufacturers, engineers, and environmental scientists.
Furthermore, these successes underscore a broader trend where consumer demand for sustainable products is driving industry change across various sectors beyond just housing solutions like mobile homes. By embracing green technologies sooner rather than later-both out of ecological necessity as well as economic opportunity-the refrigeration industry stands poised not only to meet contemporary needs but also shape future standards globally.
In conclusion, exploring less harmful refrigerant choices offers tangible benefits both environmentally and economically within the realm of mobile homes-a microcosm reflecting broader shifts towards sustainability worldwide. Through continued research investment coupled with strategic partnerships across disciplines aiming at reducing our carbon footprint collectively; we pave new pathways toward more conscientious living environments today while safeguarding resources tomorrow-a legacy truly worth striving for!
As the global community continues to grapple with the ominous impacts of climate change, the quest for sustainable living solutions has never been more urgent. Among these, mobile homes represent a unique challenge and opportunity in the realm of energy efficiency and environmental impact. In particular, cooling solutions for these homes have become a focal point, demanding innovative approaches that balance human comfort with ecological responsibility. One critical aspect of this endeavor is exploring refrigerant choices that offer lower environmental impact.
Traditionally, mobile home cooling systems have relied heavily on refrigerants like Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). While effective at maintaining desired temperatures, these substances are notorious for their high Global Warming Potential (GWP) and ozone-depleting characteristics. As awareness and regulation around environmental issues grow-evidenced by initiatives like the Kigali Amendment to phase down HFCs-it's imperative that we pivot towards alternatives that minimize harm to our planet.
Emerging refrigerants such as Hydrofluoroolefins (HFOs) present a promising path forward. With a significantly lower GWP compared to traditional options, HFOs are engineered to decompose more quickly in the atmosphere, thus reducing their long-term environmental footprint. Furthermore, they offer comparable efficiency levels, ensuring that users do not sacrifice performance for sustainability. The development and adoption of HFO-based technologies could mark a significant leap toward greener cooling systems in mobile homes.
In parallel, natural refrigerants like ammonia (NH3), carbon dioxide (CO2), and hydrocarbons are gaining traction due to their negligible or zero GWP. These compounds harness naturally occurring processes to deliver efficient cooling without contributing significantly to greenhouse gas emissions. However, challenges remain in terms of safety and infrastructure adaptation-ammonia's toxicity, for example, necessitates careful handling protocols while CO2 requires high-pressure systems which can be cost-prohibitive.
Fortunately, innovation is not limited to chemical composition alone; it extends into system design and integration as well. Advanced heat pump technologies and hybrid systems are being developed to maximize efficiency while using environmentally friendly refrigerants. For instance, transcritical CO2 heat pumps leverage CO2's properties under specific conditions to provide effective cooling even in challenging climates-a boon for mobile home residents who often face diverse weather patterns across geographies.
Moreover, digital technology plays an increasingly vital role in optimizing these systems' performance. Smart thermostats and IoT-enabled devices allow users greater control over their environment while minimizing energy waste through adaptive learning algorithms that adjust settings based on real-time data inputs.
The journey toward sustainable cooling solutions for mobile homes is complex but filled with potential breakthroughs that promise both ecological benefits and enhanced quality of life for occupants. By prioritizing low-impact refrigerant choices alongside cutting-edge technology integration, we can chart a course toward reduced carbon footprints without compromising on comfort or convenience.
Ultimately, fostering collaboration between industry stakeholders-including manufacturers, policymakers, researchers-and end-users will be crucial in accelerating the transition towards greener alternatives globally. Only through concerted effort can we ensure that future generations inherit not only innovative cooling solutions but also a healthier planet upon which they can thrive comfortably within their homes-wherever those may be parked along life's winding roads.
![]() |
The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject.(April 2017)
|
Part of a series on |
Living spaces |
---|
![]() |
A mobile home (also known as a house trailer, park home, trailer, or trailer home) is a prefabricated structure, built in a factory on a permanently attached chassis before being transported to site (either by being towed or on a trailer). Used as permanent homes, or for holiday or temporary accommodation, they are often left permanently or semi-permanently in one place, but can be moved, and may be required to move from time to time for legal reasons.
Mobile homes share the same historic origins as travel trailers, but today the two are very different, with travel trailers being used primarily as temporary or vacation homes. Behind the cosmetic work fitted at installation to hide the base, mobile homes have strong trailer frames, axles, wheels, and tow-hitches.
In the United States, this form of housing goes back to the early years of cars and motorized highway travel.[1] It was derived from the travel trailer (often referred to during the early years as "house trailers" or "trailer coaches"), a small unit with wheels attached permanently, often used for camping or extended travel. The original rationale for this type of housing was its mobility. Units were initially marketed primarily to people whose lifestyle required mobility. However, in the 1950s, the homes began to be marketed primarily as an inexpensive form of housing designed to be set up and left in a location for long periods of time or even permanently installed with a masonry foundation. Previously, units had been eight feet or fewer in width, but in 1956, the 10-foot (3.0 m) wide home ("ten-wide") was introduced, along with the new term "mobile home".[2]
The homes were given a rectangular shape, made from pre-painted aluminum panels, rather than the streamlined shape of travel trailers, which were usually painted after assembly. All of this helped increase the difference between these homes and home/travel trailers. The smaller, "eight-wide" units could be moved simply with a car, but the larger, wider units ("ten-wide", and, later, "twelve-wide") usually required the services of a professional trucking company, and, often, a special moving permit from a state highway department. During the late 1960s and early 1970s, the homes were made even longer and wider, making the mobility of the units more difficult. Nowadays, when a factory-built home is moved to a location, it is usually kept there permanently and the mobility of the units has considerably decreased. In some states, mobile homes have been taxed as personal property if the wheels remain attached, but as real estate if the wheels are removed. Removal of the tongue and axles may also be a requirement for real estate classification.
Mobile homes built in the United States since June 1976, legally referred to as manufactured homes, are required to meet FHA certification requirements and come with attached metal certification tags. Mobile homes permanently installed on owned land are rarely mortgageable, whereas FHA code manufactured homes are mortgageable through VA, FHA, and Fannie Mae.
Many people who could not afford a traditional site-built home, or did not desire to commit to spending a large sum of money on housing, began to see factory-built homes as a viable alternative for long-term housing needs. The units were often marketed as an alternative to apartment rental. However, the tendency of the units of this era to depreciate rapidly in resale value[citation needed] made using them as collateral for loans much riskier than traditional home loans. Terms were usually limited to less than the thirty-year term typical of the general home-loan market, and interest rates were considerably higher.[citation needed] In that way, mobile home loans resembled motor vehicle loans more than traditional home mortgage loans.
Mobile homes come in two major sizes, single-wides and double-wides. Single-wides are 18 feet (5.5 m) or less in width and 90 feet (27 m) or less in length and can be towed to their site as a single unit. Double-wides are 20 feet (6.1 m) or more wide and are 90 feet (27 m) in length or less and are towed to their site in two separate units, which are then joined. Triple-wides and even homes with four, five, or more units are also built but less frequently.
While site-built homes are rarely moved, single-wide owners often "trade" or sell their home to a dealer in the form of the reduction of the purchase of a new home. These "used" homes are either re-sold to new owners or to park owners who use them as inexpensive rental units. Single-wides are more likely to be traded than double-wides because removing them from the site is easier. In fact, only about 5% of all double-wides will ever be moved.[citation needed]
While an EF1 tornado might cause minor damage to a site-built home, it could do significant damage to a factory-built home, especially an older model or one that is not properly secured. Also, structural components (such as windows) are typically weaker than those in site-built homes.[3] 70 miles per hour (110 km/h) winds can destroy a mobile home in a matter of minutes. Many brands offer optional hurricane straps, which can be used to tie the home to anchors embedded in the ground.
In the United States, mobile homes are regulated by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), via the Federal National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974. This national regulation has allowed many manufacturers to distribute nationwide because they are immune to the jurisdiction of local building authorities.[4] [5]: 1 By contrast, producers of modular homes must abide by state and local building codes. There are, however, wind zones adopted by HUD that home builders must follow. For example, statewide, Florida is at least wind zone 2. South Florida is wind zone 3, the strongest wind zone. After Hurricane Andrew in 1992, new standards were adopted for home construction. The codes for building within these wind zones were significantly amended, which has greatly increased their durability. During the 2004 hurricanes in Florida, these standards were put to the test, with great success. Yet, older models continue to face the exposed risk to high winds because of the attachments applied such as carports, porch and screen room additions. Such areas are exposed to "wind capture" which apply extreme force to the underside of the integrated roof panel systems, ripping the fasteners through the roof pan causing a series of events which destroys the main roof system and the home.
The popularity of the factory-built homes caused complications the legal system was not prepared to handle. Originally, factory-built homes tended to be taxed as vehicles rather than real estate, which resulted in very low property tax rates for their inhabitants. That caused local governments to reclassify them for taxation purposes.
However, even with that change, rapid depreciation often resulted in the home occupants paying far less in property taxes than had been anticipated and budgeted. The ability to move many factory-built homes rapidly into a relatively small area resulted in strains to the infrastructure and governmental services of the affected areas, such as inadequate water pressure and sewage disposal, and highway congestion. That led jurisdictions to begin placing limitations on the size and density of developments.
Early homes, even those that were well-maintained, tended to depreciate over time, much like motor vehicles. That is in contrast to site-built homes which include the land they are built on and tend to appreciate in value. The arrival of mobile homes in an area tended to be regarded with alarm, in part because of the devaluation of the housing potentially spreading to preexisting structures.
This combination of factors has caused most jurisdictions to place zoning regulations on the areas in which factory-built homes are placed, and limitations on the number and density of homes permitted on any given site. Other restrictions, such as minimum size requirements, limitations on exterior colors and finishes, and foundation mandates have also been enacted. There are many jurisdictions that will not allow the placement of any additional factory-built homes. Others have strongly limited or forbidden all single-wide models, which tend to depreciate more rapidly than modern double-wide models.
Apart from all the practical issues described above, there is also the constant discussion about legal fixture and chattels and so the legal status of a trailer is or could be affected by its incorporation to the land or not. This sometimes involves such factors as whether or not the wheels have been removed.
The North Carolina Board of Transportation allowed 14-foot-wide homes on the state's roads, but until January 1997, 16-foot-wide homes were not allowed. 41 states allowed 16-foot-wide homes, but they were not sold in North Carolina. Under a trial program approved January 10, 1997, the wider homes could be delivered on specific roads at certain times of day and travel 10 mph below the speed limit, with escort vehicles in front and behind.[6][7] Eventually, all homes had to leave the state on interstate highways.[8]
In December 1997, a study showed that the wider homes could be delivered safely, but some opponents still wanted the program to end.[9] On December 2, 1999, the NC Manufactured Housing Institute asked the state Board of Transportation to expand the program to allow deliveries of 16-foot-wide homes within North Carolina.[8] A month later, the board extended the pilot program by three months but did not vote to allow shipments within the state.[10] In June 2000, the board voted to allow 16-foot-side homes to be shipped to other states on more two-lane roads, and to allow shipments in the state east of US 220. A third escort was required, including a law enforcement officer on two-lane roads.[11]
In New York State, the Homes and Community Renewal agency tracks mobile home parks and provides regulations concerning them. For example, the agency requires park owners to provide residents with a $15,000 grant if residents are forced to move when the land is transferred to a new owner. Residents are also granted the right of first refusal for a sale of the park, however, if the owner does not evict tenants for five years, the land sale can go ahead. State law also restricts the annual increase in land lot fee to a cap of 3 percent, unless the landowner demonstrates hardship in a local court, and can then raise the land lot fee by up to 6 percent in a year.[12]
Mobile homes are often sited in land lease communities known as trailer parks (also 'trailer courts', 'mobile home parks', 'mobile home communities', 'manufactured home communities', 'factory-built home communities' etc.); these communities allow homeowners to rent space on which to place a home. In addition to providing space, the site often provides basic utilities such as water, sewer, electricity, or natural gas and other amenities such as mowing, garbage removal, community rooms, pools, and playgrounds.
There are over 38,000[13] trailer parks in the United States ranging in size from 5 to over 1,000 home sites. Although most parks appeal to meeting basic housing needs, some communities specialize towards certain segments of the market. One subset of mobile home parks, retirement communities, restrict residents to those age 55 and older. Another subset of mobile home parks, seasonal communities, are located in popular vacation destinations or are used as a location for summer homes. In New York State, as of 2019, there were 1,811 parks with 83,929 homes.[12]
Newer homes, particularly double-wides, tend to be built to much higher standards than their predecessors and meet the building codes applicable to most areas. That has led to a reduction in the rate of value depreciation of most used units.[14]
Additionally, modern homes tend to be built from materials similar to those used in site-built homes rather than inferior, lighter-weight materials. They are also more likely to physically resemble site-built homes. Often, the primary differentiation in appearance is that factory-built homes tend to have less of a roof slope so that they can be readily transported underneath bridges and overpasses.[citation needed]
The number of double-wide units sold exceeds the number of single-wides, which is due in part to the aforementioned zoning restrictions. Another reason for higher sales is the spaciousness of double-wide units, which are now comparable to site-built homes. Single-wide units are still popular primarily in rural areas, where there are fewer restrictions. They are frequently used as temporary housing in areas affected by natural disasters when restrictions are temporarily waived.[citation needed]
Another recent trend has been parks in which the owner of the mobile home owns the lot on which their unit is parked. Some of these communities simply provide land in a homogeneous neighborhood, but others are operated more like condominiums with club homes complete with swimming pools and meeting rooms which are shared by all of the residents, who are required to pay membership fees and dues.
Mobile home (or mobile-homes) are used in many European campgrounds to refer to fixed caravans, purpose-built cabins, and even large tents, which are rented by the week or even year-round as cheap accommodation, similar to the US concept of a trailer park. Like many other US loanwords, the term is not used widely in Britain.[citation needed]
Mobile Homes or Static Caravans are popular across the United Kingdom. They are more commonly referred to as Park Homes or Leisure Lodges, depending on if they are marketed as a residential dwelling or as a second holiday home residence.
Residential Mobile homes (park homes) are built to the BS3632 standard. This standard is issued by the British Standards Institute. The institute is a UK body who produce a range of standards for businesses and products to ensure they are fit for purpose. The majority of residential parks in the UK have a minimum age limit for their residents, and are generally marketed as retirement or semi-retirement parks. Holiday Homes, static caravans or holiday lodges aren't required to be built to BS3632 standards, but many are built to the standard.
In addition to mobile homes, static caravans are popular across the UK. Static caravans have wheels and a rudimentary chassis with no suspension or brakes and are therefore transported on the back of large flatbed lorries, the axle and wheels being used for movement to the final location when the static caravan is moved by tractor or 4×4. A static caravan normally stays on a single plot for many years and has many of the modern conveniences normally found in a home.
Mobile homes are designed and constructed to be transportable by road in one or two sections. Mobile homes are no larger than 20 m × 6.8 m (65 ft 7 in × 22 ft 4 in) with an internal maximum height of 3.05 m (10 ft 0 in). Legally, mobile homes can still be defined as "caravans".
Static holiday caravans generally have sleeping accommodation for 6 to 10 people in 2, 3 or 4 bedrooms and on convertible seating in the lounge referred to as a 'pull out bed'. They tend towards a fairly "open-plan" layout, and while some units are double glazed and centrally heated for year-round use, cheaper models without double glazing or central heating are available for mainly summer use. Static caravan holiday homes are intended for leisure use and are available in 10 and 12 ft (3.0 and 3.7 m) widths, a small number in 13 and 14 ft (4.0 and 4.3 m) widths, and a few 16 ft (4.9 m) wide, consisting of two 8 ft (2.4 m) wide units joined. Generally, holiday homes are clad in painted steel panels, but can be clad in PVC, timber or composite materials. Static caravans are sited on caravan parks where the park operator of the site leases a plot to the caravan owner. There are many holiday parks in the UK in which one's own static caravan can be owned. There are a few of these parks in areas that are prone to flooding and anyone considering buying a sited static caravan needs to take particular care in checking that their site is not liable to flooding.
Static caravans can be rented on an ad-hoc basis or purchased. Purchase prices range from £25,000 to £100,000. Once purchased, static caravans have various ongoing costs including insurance, site fees, local authority rates, utility charges, winterisation and depreciation. Depending on the type of caravan and the park these costs can range from £1,000 to £40,000 per year.[15] Some park owners used to have unfair conditions in their lease contracts but the Office of Fair Trading has produced a guidance document available for download called Unfair Terms in Holiday Caravan Agreements which aims to stop unfair practices.
Many Israeli settlements and outposts are originally composed of caravans (Hebrew: קר×Âוו×Âן caravan; pl. קר×Âוו×Â× ×™×Â, caravanim). They are constructed of light metal, are not insulated but can be outfitted with heating and air-conditioning units, water lines, recessed lighting, and floor tiling to function in a full-service capacity. Starting in 2005, prefabricated homes, named caravillas (Hebrew: קרוויל×â€), a portmanteau of the words caravan, and villa, begin to replace mobile homes in many Israeli settlements.
Because of similarities in the manufacturing process, some companies build both types in their factories. Modular homes are transported on flatbed trucks rather than being towed, and lack axles and an automotive-type frame. However, some modular homes are towed behind a semi-truck or toter on a frame similar to that of a trailer. The home is usually in two pieces and is hauled by two separate trucks. Each frame has five or more axles, depending on the size of the home. Once the home has reached its location, the axles and the tongue of the frame are then removed, and the home is set on a concrete foundation by a large crane.
Both styles are commonly referred to as factory-built housing, but that term's technical use is restricted to a class of homes regulated by the Federal National Mfd. Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974.
Most zoning restrictions on the homes have been found to be inapplicable or only applicable to modular homes. That occurs often after considerable litigation on the topic by affected jurisdictions and by plaintiffs failing to ascertain the difference. Most modern modulars, once fully assembled, are indistinguishable from site-built homes. Their roofs are usually transported as separate units. Newer modulars also come with roofs that can be raised during the setting process with cranes. There are also modulars with 2 to 4 storeys.
Very knowledgeable, friendly, helpful and don't make you feel like you're inconveniencing them. They seem willing to take all the time you need. As if you're the only thing they have to do that day. The store is clean, organized and not cluttered, symmetrical at that. Cuz I'm even and symmetricals biggest fan. It was a pleasure doing business with them and their prices are definitely reasonable. So, I'll be doing business with them in the future no doubt.
This is another amazing place where we will do much more business. They are not tyrannical about the totally useless face diapers, they have a great selection of stock, they have very knowledgeable staff, very friendly staff. We got the plumbing items we really needed and will be getting more plumbing items. They also have central units, thermostats, caulking, sealants, doors, seems everything you need for a mobile home. We've found a local treasure and will be bringing much more business. Their store is clean and tidy as well!
Horrible workmanship, horrible customer service, don't show up when they say they are. Ghosted. Was supposed to come back on Monday, no call no show. Called Tuesday and Wednesday, left messages both days. Nothing. Kinked my line, crooked to the pad and house, didn't put disconnect back on, left the trash.....
Went to get a deadbolt what they had was one I was told I'd have take it apart to lengthen and I said I wasn't buying something new and have to work on it. Thing of it is I didn't know if it was so that it could be lengthened said I didn't wanna buy something new I had to work on just to fit my door. He got all mad and slung the whole box with part across the room. A real business man. I guess the owner approves of his employees doing as such.
Royal installed a new furnace and air conditioner just before we got our used mobile home. Recently, the furnace stopped lighting. Jared (sp?) made THREE trips to get it back to good. He was so gracious and kind. Fortunately for us it was still under warranty. BTW, those three trips were from Fenton, Missouri to Belleville, Illinois! Thanks again, Jared!