Green Metropolis

The required reading for the course that I am taking called Sustainable Futures is "Green Metropolis," by David Owen. He has written a few fantastic articles for the New Yorker, such as the "Inventor's Dilemma," that are sadly not available without a subscription, so sorry, no link. His book is about how living in New York City is more sustainable than living in the suburbs due to the fact that New Yorkers use the least energy per person because they live in smaller spaces and use public transportation. If everyone in the US produced as many greenhouse gases as New York City residents, greenhouse gases would be reduced by 71%. I agree that living in New York City is definitely more environmentally friendly than living in my parent's house in New Hampshire. We have quite a large house and in the winter, my parents shut the heat off in half of it, burn wood, and keep the temperature very low in order to reduce heating costs. We also have to drive at least twenty minutes to the nearest city in order to run errands and farther for entertainment or to visit relatives.

There are a few issues that I disagree with him on, such as his views on food production. He states in his book that "The idea that a product travels a certain distance and is therefore worse than the one you raised nearby, well, that's just idiotic. It doesn't take into consideration the land use, the type of transport, the weather, or even the season." I agree that locally produced products do not take these factors into consideration, but he is also not taking into consideration the other benefits of buying food and other products locally, such as having a relationship with the producer and supporting local economies. Additionally, local products usually are fresher, were produced using more environmentally friendly practices, used less packaging, and was transported shorter distances than conventional products. He also says that vertical farming in Manhattan would make the city less green because the space could be better used to "stack people instead of plants." This statement I disagree with entirely because spaces that would not be used to stack people, such as rooftops and window ledges could be used to grow produce. He also doesn't take into account the additional benefits of urban agriculture, such as community education on nutrition and ecology in areas that have high rates of diet-related diseases and low access to nutritious food and green spaces. Greenery also has added environmental benefits to urban areas, such as decreasing runoff, reducing the urban heat island effect, and improving aesthetics, which makes people happier to live in the city. I am currently writing a paper for this class with three other people on this topic. : )

I also noticed that he had permanent frown lines on his face and while I was waiting for the classroom doors to open, he was standing next to me and I got a lot of negative vibes from him. I guess that's what happens when you think about sustainability day after day. : ( You can't really tell from this photo I took from the New Yorker contributor page (http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/bios/david_owen/search?contributorName=david%20owen) though, but it was the best I could find.