There are any number of reasons to build a dome -- not the least of which that they're just cool. But we'll try to give you some more factual rationales.

Our first [and probably most pragmatic] reason revolves around the cost and ease of construction. If you've looked through the site, you know that this is a tremendously remote location; the nearest Lowe's is a two-hour round trip if you just go and turn around in the parking lot -- and it wasn't put in until last year. Quotes for even a normal stick-built, moderately fabricated log cabin were in the neighborhood of $110 a square foot and would take half a year at least. All in all, a difficult project, etcetera.

We built the house for significantly less than $70 a square, including major appliances. With professional, contract labor. On the side of a mountain. And had the shell up and fitted in the space of one Saturday afternoon, using a couple of wrenches, a drift, a hammer and a hydraulic lift. Tough to beat.

Another price consideration was energy cost. Although we are off-grid and self-powered, we didn't want to have to put in an entire wind and solar array simply to heat the house -- and propane is never going to get any cheaper. Domes are vastly more energy efficient than square housing; convection currents will do most of the work for you to distribute heat effectively. Adding in two large skylights on the southern and western faces for passive solar is just an added bonus. As you'll find mentioned elsewhere, the fireplace is more than efficient enough -- we haven't turned the furnace on except to test it in two years.

Conversely, there's no real need for an air-conditioning system -- yet another huge power drain. By cracking the windows at top and bottom of the 30 foot space and turning on the ceiling fan, you can get what almost amounts to a full breeze inside the structure -- all due to that same convection.

It's also important to remember that due to their spherical structure, domes provide the greatest amount of volume for the least amount of surface area; the upshot of this is less surface area means fewer surfaces have to cope with the second law of thermodynamics. Effectively, you simply lose less of your heating or cooling.

Additionally, you really don't need that much in terms of lighting at night; lower wattage bulbs in the primary living space light the entire area effectively, as there are no right angles to block the light.

The last bit about lower cost is a bit hidden -- but with a lower external footprint you have lower external maintenance costs. This particular dome is mostly roof; it doesn't need paint or new siding. You can clean the gutters with a three rung step ladder at their highest point. And you can climb the roof without a ladder at all.

Then there's strength. Simply put, domes are stronger than structures built with conventional techniques. They'll handle more wind, more snow, larger earthquakes -- and more impacts. There are a large number of documented instances and news footage of domes being the only building standing after the rest of a neighborhood has been flattened by Mother Nature using one or two of the tools at her disposal. To the best of our knowledge, there is no recorded instance of a properly constructed dome collapsing under it's own weight -- and by proper we mean that someone actually nailed the thing together instead of using baling wire -- even using a wide variety of fairly fragile materials. [The one exception to this is an anecdote about Buckminster Fuller once trying to lift a dome made of cardboard off the deck of an aircraft carrier via helicopter in a squall; we don't think this really counts.]

Don't believe us? Ask the United States military; guess what they built as a permanent structure at the South Pole -- and like to use for polar listening stations? There's a reason why big arenas are built this way, too.

Finally, and probably least important, is history. The world's first geodesic dome building that could sustain its own weight was erected by Dr. Fuller in 1949 at Black Mountain College -- a bit over 20 miles away as the Dymaxion Plane flies, or 70 or so taking mountain roads. This is dome land; there are a number of structures in the area, including downtown Asheville.

To sum it all up: You have cost and material effectiveness in construction; cost effectiveness in energy; lower maintenance costs; greater strength and safety; better aesthetics and airflow. Why would we build anything else?

Perhaps the best way to put it is this: We'll be building another one.