Dirt-based construction is an intriguing idea, but generally you are trading materials cost (which is already relatively low) for quite a bit of labor cost.
A system that cheaply allows for enduring dirt-based construction would be an interesting advancement, but I'm not sure how universal that system would be.
This is a neat project from a design/engineering viewpoint, but it seems it's addressing the 'problem' of "houses look hard to make; how can it look like something I can do?" Same reason I'm skeptical of 3D printed houses.
We had looked into SIPs for our relatively fancy house, but budget won out. There are lots of neat building solutions that cost too much. If you think labor costs are high, wait til you try to find someone who will learn a new system.
Construction cost is not the reason that housing supply is tight—but engineers don't have as much fun fighting for better zoning policy.
Bagged earth construction is great, however you are adding a TON of labor. So much so that in a developed country you might as well just use brick construction because it will be cheaper.
In addition, in my area I would have to have my dirt amended because we have very sandy soil, but I don't know by how much because a few feet down that sandy soil turns to clay.
They have some mobile dirt brick factory machines, but those seem to be home-built prototypes for the most part.
Unfired clay brick production is incredibly labor intensive, and generally you'll want to produce those bricks on-site because they don't transport well.
SIPs are neat (https://www.sips.org/what-are-sips), but even they are an added cost.
Dirt-based construction is an intriguing idea, but generally you are trading materials cost (which is already relatively low) for quite a bit of labor cost.
A system that cheaply allows for enduring dirt-based construction would be an interesting advancement, but I'm not sure how universal that system would be.