Climate Change: Could Megacities Save The Earth?

 

(Drivebycuriosity) - There`s a lot talk about climate change caused by emissions of CO2. About a quarter of these greenhouse gases are emitted by cars & trucks (chart below .epa.gov ). Reducing the numbers of cars and reducing driving significantly could curb global warming. The problem is that many people live in suburbs or in the hinterland, called the sprawl, and they need to drive a lot for jobs, labor & leisure.

If a large part of the suburb and sprawl dwellers could be attracted to move to big cities this would result in less driving and so limit the greenhouse effect. I live in New York City and I don´t need a car (and I don`t have one) because the distances are short. Most things can be done by walking or using subways & buses. I understand that many people prefer to live outside big cities and often cannot afford the rents there. So cities need to get much cheaper and more attractive. Today rents are artificially kept high by regulation. Zoning laws limit the heights of the buildings and so the number of available apartments. If the big communities change their zoning laws and allow much higher buildings the cities could grow vertical and become much bigger. 

If a large part of the US population - today about 320 million people - would move to New York City, Los Angeles, Dallas, Chicago, Atlanta and other metropolises these communities would become megacities with each more than 10 million residents. The same would happen other countries. I think New York City, London, Madrid, Paris  & Co. could do that if they grow vertical. Skyscrapers  -  especially the new slim towers you can see now in Manhattan - don´t need much space. Upwards is a lot of space, thanks to modern technologies. These towers multiply the number of available apartments per square foot.

Unfortunately the new skyscrapers are very expensive partly caused by zoning laws. The constructors need to buy additional "air rights" which allow them to buy the unused air space of their neighbors and add it on to their own lot  (theguardian). These "air rights" raise the costs of the new towers and so the rents & apartment prices. If the cities abandon the height limits they would reduce the construction costs and would allow to raise the number of apartments significantly - which would raise the supply and so lower the rents. But even with today´s zoning laws new Manhattan mega-projects like Hudson Yard or Essex Crossing in lower Manhattan include some flats with affordable rents (by lottery curbed ). 

 

The idea of vertical cities is already bearing fruit. Singapore, which has to deal with a very limited space, created a "vertical village",  a building complex that contains 31 stacked’ residential blocks and is six stories tall. The construction includes swimming pools, tennis courts, gardens and roof terraces (images above  independent). If the cities allow much higher buildings and construct vertical villages they would create enough free space between the towers for parks & ponds.

 

China comes closest to this vision. Metropolises like Chongqing, Beijing, Shanghai & Shenzen are already turning into megacities with more than 20 million residents (cnn). Chengdu, the capital of the Sichuan province (population 14 million), plans to develop into a garden city with lots of parks & gardens between the skyscrapers (telegraph).  China's rulers also plan to weld some communities at the northeast coast together and to create a megapolis, called Jing-Jin-Ji, that would be home to 130 million people and cover an area the size of New England (nbcnews). China`s metropolises are already connected by the world's longest network of high-speed rail lines (13,670 miles), which serve trains traveling 120 mph to 220 mph.

If a large part of the US population - and other countries - would live in megacities the nature could recover.  Today large parts of the US - and other countries - are covered with concrete (houses, malls, streets) thanks to the vast sprawl. This land could be replanted with forests, bush- and grassland would also curb the greenhouse effect and could be used for recovering.

The growth of mega-cities would raise the consume of electricity of course - for subways, electric buses, elevators and such - which today creates already nearly 30% of the greenhouse gases (chart above). The US and other countries could follow France which reduced the CO2 emission by generating more electricity by nuclear plants. Today the French create about 80% of their electric power from nuclear plants, which emit zero CO2 (cleantechnica). More electric power by nukes would also lower the cost for electricity and animate to use more of it for residential uses (heating, cooking), which today generates about 10% of the greenhouse gases.  So the raise of mega-cities combined with a revival of nuclear energy could reduce the emission of CO2 significantly

 I am aware that everybody has the right to stay in the sprawl and to continue to drive a lot. You may do so, but please, stop whining about climate change.