By TIM KILLEEN
Richard Florida wrote yesterday at The Atlantic about 2009's rise in city populations. The Atlantic as an organization has begun a fascination with the revival that urban areas have seen over the last 10 or 20 years, with more young people opting for these areas and the major innovations that have had to come out of that growing population. One thing that's been discussed- but not enough- is how cities are reshaping our use of energy and making the world a more "green" place to live.
When you first think about it, the idea of cities being better for the environment may seem backwards. Don't areas with high populations cause a lot of pollution? Aren't we doing terrible things to the land by constantly expanding our city limits and tearing down more trees and green space to accommodate more people? Yes, sort of. But cities are green in a whole host of ways that suburbs simply are not.
First, cramming people into a smaller area may mean a lot of pollution in that one area, but it's much more efficient to have people living in closer quarters than all spread out. People in tight spaces make choices out of necessity that also happen to be green: smaller homes and apartments use less energy; owning a condo in a larger building is more efficient for heating and cooling than separate homes; people often opt out of driving places as to avoid traffic and take public transportation, walk or bike instead. And with the rise in population, most cities don't seem to be expanding out, but up- causing efficiency to actually rise rather than razing nature.
Cities are also leading the way in a lot of environmental innovation. Energy grids are becoming "smarter," in an attempt to better distribute clean energy where it's needed and conserve it where it's not. Electric cars are perfect for city driving, as the current state of batteries dictates short commutes. Public transit, already a fairly green concept, is moving even farther to reduce emissions, with cities purchasing hybrid buses and using more efficient rail systems. Urban planning has, for a good while, considered green space within a city to be paramount to sound city layouts. And, as Chadwick Flores explained yesterday, urban agriculture is seeing a revival, with more farmer's markets, community gardens, etc. popping up all over and city restaurants beginning to use more sustainable and local produce. (Huffington Post even recently ran this story about green bars- most of which are in cities).
Certainly, city living has its environmental downsides and it's not as green as living out on a farm and growing your own food. But as more people opt for an urban lifestyle, it's interesting to watch what once was considered a dirty and environmentally-dangerous way to live make a 180-degree turn. Cities continue to make advancements in the green movement and should be commended and recognized for those achievements.
Richard Florida wrote yesterday at The Atlantic about 2009's rise in city populations. The Atlantic as an organization has begun a fascination with the revival that urban areas have seen over the last 10 or 20 years, with more young people opting for these areas and the major innovations that have had to come out of that growing population. One thing that's been discussed- but not enough- is how cities are reshaping our use of energy and making the world a more "green" place to live.
When you first think about it, the idea of cities being better for the environment may seem backwards. Don't areas with high populations cause a lot of pollution? Aren't we doing terrible things to the land by constantly expanding our city limits and tearing down more trees and green space to accommodate more people? Yes, sort of. But cities are green in a whole host of ways that suburbs simply are not.
First, cramming people into a smaller area may mean a lot of pollution in that one area, but it's much more efficient to have people living in closer quarters than all spread out. People in tight spaces make choices out of necessity that also happen to be green: smaller homes and apartments use less energy; owning a condo in a larger building is more efficient for heating and cooling than separate homes; people often opt out of driving places as to avoid traffic and take public transportation, walk or bike instead. And with the rise in population, most cities don't seem to be expanding out, but up- causing efficiency to actually rise rather than razing nature.
Cities are also leading the way in a lot of environmental innovation. Energy grids are becoming "smarter," in an attempt to better distribute clean energy where it's needed and conserve it where it's not. Electric cars are perfect for city driving, as the current state of batteries dictates short commutes. Public transit, already a fairly green concept, is moving even farther to reduce emissions, with cities purchasing hybrid buses and using more efficient rail systems. Urban planning has, for a good while, considered green space within a city to be paramount to sound city layouts. And, as Chadwick Flores explained yesterday, urban agriculture is seeing a revival, with more farmer's markets, community gardens, etc. popping up all over and city restaurants beginning to use more sustainable and local produce. (Huffington Post even recently ran this story about green bars- most of which are in cities).
Certainly, city living has its environmental downsides and it's not as green as living out on a farm and growing your own food. But as more people opt for an urban lifestyle, it's interesting to watch what once was considered a dirty and environmentally-dangerous way to live make a 180-degree turn. Cities continue to make advancements in the green movement and should be commended and recognized for those achievements.
No comments:
Post a Comment