News

Alex Steffen of WorldChanging on why developing low-emissions vehicles is nowhere near as important as developing more compact, efficient and livable cities. Focus on new automotive technologies can distract us from the much more effective strategy of building in less-consumptive ways.
[These excerpts are from a draft essay: reading the whole thing is highly recommended, as he discusses some important issues about the trade-offs that commuters make, the true impacts of cars (which go far beyond what comes from the tailpipe), and our potential for remaking our cities and way of life. - Ed.]
By Alex Steffen
Today's cars are costly, dangerous and an ecological nightmare. What if the solution to the problems they create, though, has more to do with where we live than what we drive?
...
Our efforts to build a one-planet prosperity may involve an astonishing variety of new approaches, but in the U.S., we most need to adopt one solution that leverages almost all the others: stop sprawl and build well-designed compact communities. That's because the land-use patterns in our communities dictate not only how much we drive, but how sustainable we're able to be on all sort of fronts.
Sprawled-out land uses generate enormous amounts of automotive greenhouse gasses. A recent major study, Growing Cooler, makes the point clearly: if 60 percent of new developments were even modestly more compact, we'd emit 85 million fewer metric tons of tailpipe CO2 each year by 2030 -- as much as would be saved by raising the national mileage standards to 32 mpg.
In other words, there is a direct relationship between the kinds of places we live, the transportation choices we have, and how much we drive. The best car-related innovation we have is not to improve the car, but eliminate the need to drive it everywhere we go.
And the amount of density the study's authors call for is extremely modest. They encourage building new projects at a density of 13 homes per acre, raising the average national density from 7.6 units per acre to 9 an acre.
...
Some people make the argument that the built environment is much harder to change than the design of cars -- after all, don't we buy a new car every few years and a new home at most a few times in our lives? But the reality is not so clear.
Generally, we think of cars as things which are quickly replaced in our society, and buildings as things which rarely change. But that will not be the case over the next few decades. Because of population growth, the on-going development churn in cities (buildings remodeled or replaced, etc.), infrastructure projects and changing tastes, we'll be rebuilding half our built environment between now and 2030. Done right, that new construction could enable a complete overhaul of the American city.
Photo credit: ryan paul maxwell ![]()
![]()
![]()




Post Carbon Cities is one of the key resources focusing communities on addressing peak oil as well as climate challenges. The inspiration, updated information, and pragmatic assistance that you provide is truly needed at all levels of government.
Recent comments
3 days 21 hours ago
1 week 2 days ago
3 weeks 4 days ago
3 weeks 4 days ago
3 weeks 4 days ago
6 weeks 3 days ago
6 weeks 3 days ago
6 weeks 5 days ago
7 weeks 6 days ago
8 weeks 15 hours ago