[Compugasm]

If it's better, then why not everywhere? Well, domes are everywhere. But, anything different tends to be difficult or expensive to the point of impossibility. This is why domes are really only used on sports stadiums, churches, banks, or things like this. There simply aren't enough mega-projects in the world to sustain their continual manufacture of components, and this is why it's more expensive.

It's been demonstrated that domes are viable, and lend themselves to the mass production, and component manufacture. So, I think change in the building codes would be a benefit. However, why just disaster areas? It sounds like this could be used as further justification for higher costs, simply because you live in an area with a high potential for disaster. For it to be truly cost effective, you'd have to change the building codes everywhere, and this is not going to happen.

It could also be said that mainstream culture will not accept an untraditional appearance for a home. However, how many of us are choosing where we want to live, and how many just end up there because it's what they can afford? Given the choice of having everything destroyed, or living in "untraditional" housing, this objection doesn't hold the weight it's proposed to have.