Live in a city. That's what Adam Stein argues, and he's pretty persuasive. A couple of weeks ago he gave Green Metropolis, a new book by David Owen, a favorable review. As the subtitle to Owen's book puts it, the key to living sustainably is living smaller, living closer, and driving less are the keys to sustainability. Put that way it's hard to argue with.
Living smaller? Sure. Living smaller means consuming less and making fewer demands on the planet's resources. My partner and I live reasonably simply. We're mostly vegetarian, for health reasons as much as environmental ones. We recycle as much as we can, we keep the thermostats turned down, and we turn lights off whenever we leave a room.
Driving less? Sure. Part of living smaller, isn't it. Who wouldn't take public transport if they live in a place where its comfortable and convenient. Public transit is non-existent in rural northeastern Connecticut, so I drive less by combining trips to school with stops at the grocery store and by combining several shopping trips into one whenever I can.
Living closer? This is where it gets interesting. I'll quote just a little of Stein's response to comments on his favorable review:
Bottom line. Your friend with a small apartment in Manhattan probably has a smaller carbon footprint than you do. She almost certainly has a smaller carbon footprint than I do, since I live in a comfortable house on a little over an acre of land, and I have to drive back and forth to work, to the grocery, to the pharmacy, to anywhere I want to go other than for a walk around my neighborhood.1
So if you really want to be green, move to Manhattan (or DC or San Francisco or Chicago or Seattle or Boston), take the subway or bus to work, and grow your vegetables in a community garden.
Living smaller? Sure. Living smaller means consuming less and making fewer demands on the planet's resources. My partner and I live reasonably simply. We're mostly vegetarian, for health reasons as much as environmental ones. We recycle as much as we can, we keep the thermostats turned down, and we turn lights off whenever we leave a room.
Driving less? Sure. Part of living smaller, isn't it. Who wouldn't take public transport if they live in a place where its comfortable and convenient. Public transit is non-existent in rural northeastern Connecticut, so I drive less by combining trips to school with stops at the grocery store and by combining several shopping trips into one whenever I can.
Living closer? This is where it gets interesting. I'll quote just a little of Stein's response to comments on his favorable review:
I recently read that a freight train can move a ton of goods 460 miles on a single gallon of diesel. Your car can move a bag of groceries about 20 miles on a single gallon of gasoline. Sustainability is best measured by proximity to a supermarket, not a farm. (emphasis in the original)That's right. It matters more how close you live to where you buy your food than where it's produced. And it matters even more how it's produced. Over 80% of the carbon footprint associated with food is associated with producing it, not with transporting it (source).
Bottom line. Your friend with a small apartment in Manhattan probably has a smaller carbon footprint than you do. She almost certainly has a smaller carbon footprint than I do, since I live in a comfortable house on a little over an acre of land, and I have to drive back and forth to work, to the grocery, to the pharmacy, to anywhere I want to go other than for a walk around my neighborhood.1
So if you really want to be green, move to Manhattan (or DC or San Francisco or Chicago or Seattle or Boston), take the subway or bus to work, and grow your vegetables in a community garden.
1And, no. It's not just because I'm lazy. The nearest supermarket and pharmacy are a little over 3 miles away. The nearest other stores are 5-10 miles away.
Leave a comment