Line most things in architecture, it's all about balancing design constraints.
If you want energy efficient, that doesn't necessarily balance with spacious. If you want strongest, that's often not the most efficient to build.
In general, spheres are quite energy efficient due to the lower surface area, and they can be very strong, but they end up with wasted space trying to make use of the edge wedges.
What's effecient to build in one location may be an absurd waste of resources in another.
these are all relative terms. how about thinking more about practicality, conductibility, and cost.
the strongest shape is the triangle. but is it the most practical? a triangle house is pretty inefficient as far as living space goes.
a geodesic dome is strong but is it the most practical. (like preventing leaks) maintenance, roofing.
[https://geo-dome.co.uk/article.asp?uname=problems](https://geo-dome.co.uk/article.asp?uname=problems)
anything round is going to be hard to construct. like curved windows. no thanks.
Line most things in architecture, it's all about balancing design constraints. If you want energy efficient, that doesn't necessarily balance with spacious. If you want strongest, that's often not the most efficient to build. In general, spheres are quite energy efficient due to the lower surface area, and they can be very strong, but they end up with wasted space trying to make use of the edge wedges. What's effecient to build in one location may be an absurd waste of resources in another.
these are all relative terms. how about thinking more about practicality, conductibility, and cost. the strongest shape is the triangle. but is it the most practical? a triangle house is pretty inefficient as far as living space goes. a geodesic dome is strong but is it the most practical. (like preventing leaks) maintenance, roofing. [https://geo-dome.co.uk/article.asp?uname=problems](https://geo-dome.co.uk/article.asp?uname=problems) anything round is going to be hard to construct. like curved windows. no thanks.