Loading...
Activism

City is not the Problem, City is the Solution

Curitiba Rapid Transit Bus TubesLast night at the Nob Hill Masonic Center Auditorium in San Francisco, the Ecocity World Summit hosted San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom and former Mayor of Curitiba, Brazil, now Governor of Paraná Jaime Lerner.

Mayor Newsom started off proudly declaring that San Francisco has the highest recycling rate in the country at 70 percent, with a goal of zero waste by 2020. The city accepts all types of plastics and even provides a bin to compost all food, including meat! One of the few items not accepted are plastic bags, but last year San Francisco banned plastic bags from all major grocery stores.

The city has one of the most aggressive green building programs in the US. This is important because construction and operation of buildings are responsible for 40 percent of total energy use, 65 percent of total electricity use, 40 percent of air pollution and 38 percent of greenhouse gas emissions. The building below is the California Academy of Sciences which is planned to be LEED Platinum, the highest green building rating by the US Green Building Council, opening September 27, 2008.

CA Academy of Sciences

The “Zero Emissions 2020” Plan commits San Francisco to a clean air policy for public transit. Currently, 65 percent of public transit runs on alternative energy such as hybrid technologies, biodiesel from restaurant grease, electricity, natural gas or prototype fuel cells. San Francisco is also looking to replace the payroll tax with a carbon tax.

In the end, Newsom stated it is very easy to pass pro-environmental legislation, all it takes is paper and a pen, albeit recycled content paper and soy based ink. He emphasized we need to support political officials who pass environmentally friendly legislation, and to give them room to experiment, even if it means they may fail. Newsom concluded saying: “I look forward to making lots of mistakes in regards to environmental conservation.”

Next up was Jamie Lerner who has implemented innovative transportation and community designs to transform Curitiba from a grimy, congested state capital into one of the most sustainable cities in the world. Richard Register of Ecocity Builders introduced him as “one of the most creative people on the planet.”

Lerner began by saying that “innovation is starting” and this takes political will, strategy, and building an equation of core responsibility. Also, solidarity to make change will only be accomplished when we overcome pitting ourselves against one another.

The picture above is a boarding tube for the bus rapid transit. It gives buses the same efficiency as a subway since the tickets are prepaid and boarding is on the same level as the bus. These tubes, combined with articulated buses and dedicated lanes (BRT), increase passenger capacity four-fold. In 1974 when the program began, there were 25,000 people using transit each day, in 2000 there were 2.5 million passengers per day. Furthermore, the transit system is fully funded by passenger fare, not government subsidy. The city has also installed 75 miles of bicycle paths.

Portable StreetsLerner said the future of transportation must include individual transportation without private ownership. He showed a slide of these tiny cars called Dock Docks. They are half the size of a smart car, run on electricity, and work like community bike programs. They are still in concept phase but I imagine you could reserve them online or at a station with a credit card and just release them from the “dock” then return it when done.

He said each mode needs to have its own place in the city. However, part of the solution may not be space, instead it may be time. Mixed-uses of housing nearby workplaces and entertainment ensure continuous activity on the streets making them safer and more lively. In fact, Curitiba has a 24 hour street “Rua 24 Hora” and a night market. They have also created “portable streets” (picture above) which are market stalls that can be easily installed and transported to different areas of the city to facilitate activity.

They are working on a high density development, called Interbario, where 20 percent of the buildings must house plant-life on roofs and balconies. He also referenced “pas-par-tout” as a way to enclose communities or buildings in a frame. He talked about how architecture doesn’t have to be “egotecture” but can be silent architecture:

“One of the things I have learned is that we have to be committed to simplicity. There is no need to be scared of simplicity. And we can’t want to have all the answers in the world. Many cities end up putting off things because they want to understand everything. They don’t understand that innovating is about starting. Taking care of a city is a process that you start, and then give the population space to respond. There is no place in a city that can’t be better. There is no toad that can’t be a princess, no frog that can’t become a prince.”

Watch a similar presentation here and see the PowerPoint slides here.

Image credits: Bus tubes, Academy of Sciences, Portable Streets




5 comments
  1. Uncle B

    Communal groups enjoy village life , sharing breweries, wineries, bakeries and machine shops, and living in Hi-tech survival shelters that include solar oriented heating, cooling, ground heat, water conservation habits, super-insulated buildings, PV lighting with LED lights solar power, wind power,and greenhouse growing of GMO’ed bug free super veggies. Transport by carbon fiber lightweight plug in vehicles, bikes and bus or train. Smaller lighter faster people bred by years of controlled diet, able to out-produce the American oafs of today, and requiring less energy to transport, feed, clothe or even bury, Smurphs! yea, lets become Smurphs

  2. walter libby

    Can Sustainable Cities Save The Planet?

    By Walter Libby

    http://theendpoint.blogspot.com/

    Can sustainable cities save the planet? This is a good question and it deserves a good answer. But a more relevant question is, can sustainable cities save the United States? Our rising unemployment rate in the global economy has finally caught up with us—we are out of bubbles and are now a nation at risk. With nine straight months of job losses and a looming financial crisis, our prospects look grim—despite the efforts being made to prop up our financial system.

    The problem is we are in liquidity trap. Here, despite low interest rates, the infusion of new blood, the cash that is being pumped into banks will just sit in their vaults as recession forces consumers to cut back on spending forcing firms to cut back on production, investments and workers perpetuating the cycle pushing the economy ever deeper into crisis.

    The question now becomes, how do we get out the trap? We can’t look to a turn around in residential construction. But we can look to a turn around in our thinking as we shift from urban sprawl to the development of new cities designed along sustainable lines. So together with their development and the investments in renewable energy they will begin to pull us out of the trap.
    The advent of peak oil has convinced venture capitalists to get busy in saving the planet. Now we have to sell the idea of new cities to investors, developers, and the people, and that requires a model that captures their imagination and investment dollars. So following in the footsteps of Ebenezer Howard, here’s how I see cities of tomorrow: clusters of neighborhoods (linked by elevated transportation arteries shared by electric vehicles, bikes, pedestrians and rapid transit systems) will form the city. These neighborhoods are large terraced multi-storied structures sheltering thousands. Here their terraces are reserved for greenhouses and homes and their centers for factories and fully controlled-environment farms.
    So, as you walk out into your neighborhood you encounter not hallways but wide walkways, allies and breezeways lined with trees and plants, schools, hospitals, libraries, theaters, businesses, shops, and restaurants—all within walking distance, or a short elevator ride. And when you go to the first floor, at ground level you find barns (for pigs, beef and dairy cows, and chickens that are harvested next door) opening onto natural habitant mixed with organic farms, orchards, parks, playgrounds, and golf courses. Here, instead of sending our table and produce straps, our unwanted leftovers, dry bread, spoiled fruit to landfills, we recycle them to neighborhood barnyards or to community organic orchards and gardens.
    Once there is a sufficient population, a larger central city is built. This is the cultural center of the whole. Here you have universities, the larger hospitals, museums, aquariums, zoos, sports stadiums, theaters for the performing arts, large central parks, plazas, street performers, and so on.
    New cities are going to play a significant part in our economic recovery. And they are not going to be connected by super highways but by railroads carrying passengers, cars, trucks, commodities, construction equipment and freight.
    New cities, as an alternative to unsustainable urban sprawl, by itself is a strong selling point. Add to that greater efficiency, lower taxes, and a mix of town and country. But its best pitch to the captains of industry is that they are necessary for our national security and confidence in general—for Wall Street and Main Street, and for those in the world who doubt that America can resolve its economic crisis, our ability to bootstrap our economy.
    Yet, while the development of new cities will rev up our economy structural problems still plague the global economy—it’s unbalanced and so unsustainable as witnessed by our mounting trade deficits. And given that the financial crisis was brought on by our loss of jobs to the global economy (the housing bubble was the result of the Fed lowering interest rates to rock bottom in a desperate and vain attempt to avoid recession following the collapse of the dot.com bubble), we have to ponder the question, is capitalism collapsing? And this poses challenges not only for America and democracy in general, but for communist China, Russia and Venezuela as well.
    China, having taken the capitalist road, has pretty much captured the means production as multinationals, in a race to the bottom, in a race to China to beat their competitors, have left in their wake socioeconomic crisis in their respective countries—notably in the U.S. In the process China has pretty much become the factory to the world. And in doing so have created a contradiction in the global economy—who are going to buy its products? This is a contradiction that threatens China.
    And Russia and Venezuela, as oil prices plummet with a global collapse, face economic ruin—along with the rest of the oil producing countries. We need a new global order, a new world agenda.
    Mikhail Gorbachev has stated such in The Search For A New Beginning: Developing A New Civilization.
    Essentially, Gorbachev is touting sustainable development. Yet, he says “It has been the fond hope of many that the end of the Cold War would liberate the international community to work together to avert threats and work in a spirit of cooperation in addressing the dangerous problems that affect the world as a whole. But, despite the numerous summit meetings, conferences, congresses, negotiations, and agreements, there does not appear to have been any tangible progress… Between the old order and the one lies a period of transition that we must go through—moving toward a new structure of international relations marked by cooperating, interacting, and taking advantage of new opportunities. What we are seeing today, however, looks rather like a world disorder.
    It is my belief that today’s policy makers lack a necessary sense of perspective and the ability to evaluate the consequences of their actions. What is absolutely necessary is a critical reassessment of the views and approaches that currently lie at the basis of political thinking and a new combination of player to envision and carry us through to the next phase of human development.”
    The next phase of human development is the development of new sustainable cities throughout the world. As a start we should also pursue the moral equivalent of war. The industrialized nations should form an economic coalition to assist the Palestinians, the nations of Afghanistan and Pakistan, and other nations in turmoil, in the development of new cities. Peace through prosperity.
    The idea of cooperation didn’t begin with Gorbachev, it began with the atom bomb—war was out and cooperation was in. So after World War II, The World Bank and the IMF (International Monetary Fund) came into existence. Their combined mission is to foster economic growth, high levels of employment, while providing temporary loans and financial assistance to relieve debt.
    While that mission remains the same its focus should now be on the development of sustainable cities. The world faces an energy crisis as the production of oil peaks and then declines, as well a looming water crisis exacerbated by the increasing threat of droughts. Their mission should be now to focus on the development of renewable energy to power control-environment farms. And then add on the neighborhoods.
    The thing is it may well beyond the scope of the World Bank and the IMF to implement. Therefore we need a summit meeting of the industrialized nations to forge a consensus along with working out just how this is to be accomplished.
    That said, however, the first condition of the summit should be that loans or direct investments tied to the development of natural resources in the developing countries require that their leaders will channel their revenues into the development of sustainable projects while ensuring the workers receive wages sufficient for the necessities of life along with low interest loans to purchase their new homes —this means that the enlightened nations will only support democracies and work together to convince dictators and corrupt officials to rethink their positions.
    There is also something that all nations should consider: that it is in their best interest that they shift to a global economy where trade is no longer a zero-sum game, but a sustainable end game where everyone wins–it’s about cooperation and balancing trade
    There is a huge amount of work (enough to keep us all busy) to make the transition to would-be sustainable cities throughout the world, and that requires that nations with a trade surplus, who are shifting their economies (their workers) to the development of new cities, turn to those nations with a trade imbalance–an imbalance in employment–take their foreign reserves and invest in or directly trade for whatever is necessary to facilitate and expedite the building of their cities.
    Thinking that pressuring China to revaluate its currency as a solution is wrong-headed. It will only create unemployment for China and inflation for others.
    And for those who think that the conflict Marxism and liberal democracy as inevitable, they should think again—think about where sustainable are heading.
    Sustainable cities are on built on three legs: they have a source of renewable energy, produce their own food, and have the ability to manufacture their own necessary consumer goods. Today we have the technology for the first two and eventually tomorrow’s technology will replace low-wage workers with robots as the final assemblers in fully automated factories–automated factories that can be scaled to provide the necessary consumer goods on a local level—eliminating middlemen and transportation costs.
    When that day comes their will no be longer a struggle over the means of production and we’ll find ourselves at the end of history—the end of the historical ideological battle between liberal democracy and Marxism. And when that day comes we’ll also see the world’s population stabilizing just as in the industrial nations populations have stabilized (the U.S. the notable exception—but that works as it allows us build new cities) as they modernized and urbanized.
    Here, Marxism finds its final resting place in the dustbin of history. Seeing history as written in stone—seeing conflict as the final solution—is a bad idea.
    On other hand it is democracy, freewill, that puts forward the ideas to meet the challenges that a fast changing presents. But here too we have an ideology based on self-interest that is false and cowardly. Self-interest rightly understood is a collective-free-market-will that puts aside the issues that divides us and focuses on the ideas that insure the integrity of whole. The “invisible hand” as it guides ”the butcher, the baker, the brewer” has to be replaced with the hand of reason—hopefully enlightening those who subsist on corruption and greed
    Humanity was conceived ignorance. As such Gorbachev reflecting on the past tells us ”Conflicts and wars have been an organic part of history.” Another way of saying it is that “there will be trials and tribulations.”
    So we have choice, on both sides, continued conflict, continuing ignorance, or emerging cooperation. If conflict remains in place there’s another determinism to be considered—the historical determinism of weapons—best expressed by the dialectics of Marxism. The United States (the thesis) was followed by the rise of the Soviet Union (the antithesis) who together cannot exist without constantly revolutionizing the means destruction and exchange—nuclear weapons and ICBM’s. Eventually their numbers will reach a critical mass, and a great leap occurs, leading not to a synthesis, but the victory of matter over mind, the end of all history. This was “the backbone of perestroika.” It is why the Soviet Union was allowed to collapse. It is why Gorbachev posits a new world order. As I see it, a new world order where sustainable cities mark the beginning of a new epoch that not only saves the planet, but also saves us our from ourselves.
    Footnote
    Controlled-environment farming: In a world facing the challenges of severe droughts and extreme weather, looming worldwide water shortages, along with rising oil costs and rising food prices controlled-environment farms are being touted as the answer. While there are variations of indoor farming, they all are pretty much based on hydroponics and tout the same economic efficiencies. They all can be located within cities or neighborhoods. They all run on electricity, require no pesticides, herbicides nor fertilizers (all derived from fossil fuels). They produce crops year around, and depending on the technology, use from one-tenth to one-twentieth the water of conventional farms. They not only use less water, they can use recycled water from the surrounding communities.
    One up and running venture was the Phytofarm (re: Discover magazine December 1988, The Green Machine: Indoor Farming). This is a fully enclosed farm fed by artificial lighting where one acre can produce 100 times the yield of conventional farms (day or night). And while it was geared to produce leafy greens and herbs, there is practically nothing that cannot be grown indoors—albeit it would require a shift to growing some food in composted earth pots. Yet, while the project had a successful run, producing sought-after high quality crops, for a number of years, in the end it lost out due to high-energy costs and closed its doors in the early 1990s.
    Today, vertical farms are being touted along the same sustainable lines. Essentially these are high rises with greenhouses stacked on one another. Yet, they have not attracted any investors and so their technology remains in doubt. But phytofarms are a proven technology and they too can be stacked on one another. And they can start producing with the completion of the first floor. As such, the investment here can play its role in a sustainable economic recovery.
    This article can be freely quoted or paraphrased by anyone as long as they acknowledge the author.

    1. Julia Schmeichel

      Hi, just two little points.

      a) I believe that the attempt to create more sustainable cities can actually help our economy. I searched the web a little and lots of companies are now focusing on developing new technologies and changing the appearance of US cities. Siemens, for instance, have just launched a new website: http://www.usa.siemens.com/sustainablecities/index.html Let’s hope we somehow manage to create more jobs here in the US – I believe that politics and corporations need to work closely together.

      b) I had the chance to travel to Copenhagen last summer, it’s considered to be the most sustainable city in Europe. The range of sustainable technologies they use is simply amazing. Plus, it’s so nice to see Danes’ attitude towards their environment.

      Regards, Julia

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *