Climate Change Denial

[DrGriz]

The reality is, as long as we keep doing agriculture and forestry, you're going to have to have some of both rural and urban. The optimist says be as efficient as possible, the pessimist says it doesn't matter at this point.

I don't see how more people overall helps anything at this stage, and less would be better if it isn't too late.

But we all do the best we can. I hope.

It takes us about 3-4 kWh to drive round trip to the grocery in the car, much less when weather permits us to take the ebike with trailer and tow up to 90 lbs.

I moved here to support the rural community and live outside of town on land that is not useful agriculturally. We are net zero solar and have our own woodlot for heat, generally burning trees cut for fire mitigation. We are surrounded by wildfires every summer, this one no exception, so I do consider my efficient burning in a woodstove a positive.

 

[nwdiver]

I’m not arguing the benefits or drawbacks, I was just curious why you don’t live what you preach.

Because the job I found wasn't in a big city. If I could have put a large city where the job was located I would have

And I never said everyone should live in a city. I said MOST. Obviously there are lots of jobs that simply aren't compatible with living in a city. You're not going to manage 10,000 acres of farmland from a city. My profession was nuclear power. That tends not to mix well with high population densities. Now I work to help people in rural areas get solar. Also not something you can really do from a city.

What's really insane is how so many people flip it.... they work in the city and live outside the city.... you should live near where you work. It's largely a negative feedback that causes this. High populations densities are somehow viewed as bad => areas are zoned for single family homes => supply can't meet demand => prices go up => urban sprawl begins.

 

[AMPd]

Because the job I found wasn't in a big city. If I could have put a large city where the job was located I would have

And I never said everyone should live in a city. I said MOST. Obviously there are lots of jobs that simply aren't compatible with living in a city. You're not going to manage 10,000 acres of farmland from a city. My profession was nuclear power. That tends not to mix well with high population densities. Now I work to help people in rural areas get solar. Also not something you can really do from a city.

What's really insane is how so many people flip it.... they work in the city and live outside the city.... you should live near where you work. It's largely a negative feedback that causes this. High populations densities are somehow viewed as bad => areas are zoned for single family homes => supply can't meet demand => prices go up => urban sprawl begins.

I live 30 miles from work. About a 40-45 minute commute on a good day. I wish I could live closer but at the same time I want to live in a good neighborhood.

 

[nwdiver]

a good neighborhood.

That's largely a cultural construct. For some people that means houses >700' apart, ~5,000sq ft with 5 acres of green grass. For others it's a 3 bedroom condo on the 15th floor of a well maintained building with a racketball court.

And when a developer wants to put a 300 unit apartment complex down the street angry residents show up because they don't want their 'good neighborhood' to be ruined with a higher population density.... so continues the urban sprawl.

 

[AMPd]

That's largely a cultural construct. For some people that means houses >700' apart, ~5,000sq ft with 5 acres of green grass. For others it's a 3 bedroom condo on the 15th floor of a well maintained building with a racketball court.

And when a developer wants to put a 300 unit apartment complex down the street angry residents show up because they don't want their 'good neighborhood' to be ruined with a higher population density.... so continues the urban sprawl.

For me it’s a “I don’t want to be robbed or burglarized by drug addicts and gang members” cultural construct.

 

[JRP3]

Sure.... but it's never going to be close to a pair of shoes or a bicycle...

You're pretending cities aren't full of cars, as well as buses, trains, trolleys, and subways. I'd also question the emissions profile of urban housing construction vs rural. Urban structures are mostly steel and concrete where rural are mostly wood, which is a carbon sink and renewable. I don't think it's as straight forward as you imply.

 

[CyberGus]

Urban living is fine. Rural living is fine.

Urban sprawl is destroying America.

 

[nwdiver]

You're pretending cities aren't full of cars, as well as buses, trains, trolleys, and subways. I'd also question the emissions profile of urban housing construction vs rural. Urban structures are mostly steel and concrete where rural are mostly wood, which is a carbon sink and renewable. I don't think it's as straight forward as you imply.

How else are people that live outside the city going to get into to the city? Point is that if you need a car to get from where you live to where you work or shop well... you kinda need a car. If you live close enough to walk or there's mass transit you don't.

Are you really suggesting that needing to own a car is a good thing? Really? I feel like I'm trying to prove that water is wet.

Urban living is fine. Rural living is fine.

Urban sprawl is destroying America.

Exactly! The problem is that more people seeking to live in rural areas BECOMES urban sprawl because numbers. More cities or fewer people or 'rural' will cease to exist.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

That's largely a cultural construct. For some people that means houses >700' apart, ~5,000sq ft with 5 acres of green grass. For others it's a 3 bedroom condo on the 15th floor of a well maintained building with a racketball court.

And when a developer wants to put a 300 unit apartment complex down the street angry residents show up because they don't want their 'good neighborhood' to be ruined with a higher population density.... so continues the urban sprawl.

I subscribe to the City Beautiful YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCGc8ZVCsrR3dAuhvUbkbToQ) run by Dave Amos PhD (New Faculty Spotlight: Dr. Dave Amos | City & Regional Planning) and he has mentioned the NIMBY problem, as well as many other related planning issues, including making more walkable/ridable communities.

Sprawl is a key problem. But sprawl isn't just about having low-density housing, it's also the structure in how development are allowed to be built.

 

[JRP3]

Are you really suggesting that needing to own a car is a good thing? Really? I feel like I'm trying to prove that water is wet.

I'm saying that people in cities also use cars, such as Uber and taxis. Plus a large percentage of people own cars in the cities as well. NYC 45 percent of households own a vehicle, hardly the car free zone you pretend.

According to recent census estimates,[1] almost 1.4 million households in New York City own a car compared to 3.1 million total households. This means 45 percent of all households in the city own a car (and almost 3 percent that own three or more!).

NYCEDC | Building Strong Neighborhoods. Creating Good Jobs.

New York City Economic Development Corporation's mission is to encourage economic growth in each of the five boroughs of New York City by strengthenin

edc.nyc

And guess what happens in a city during a pandemic?

In Manhattan alone, new car registrations rose 76% and in Brooklyn, registrations climbed 45%.

New York car ownership jumps nearly 40% as pandemic creates mass transit worries

At the end of the day, it's safer to have a personal vehicle amid the coronavirus pandemic, but it creates a slew of new woes locally.

www.cnet.com

 

[nwdiver]

I'm saying that people in cities also use cars, such as Uber and taxis. Plus a large percentage of people own cars in the cities as well. NYC 45 percent of households own a vehicle, hardly the car free zone you pretend.

...sure... my point is in a city it's a choice. Much less so for someone that doesn't live in a city. Would you not agree that a good first step to removing cars is to remove the NEED for a car? 45% is still a LOOONG way from the ~99.9% outside a city.

 

[JRP3]

I'd agree that a city reduces the need for a car but obviously far from eliminates it.

 

[nwdiver]

I'd agree that a city reduces the need for a car but obviously far from eliminates it.

So how are the 55% of people without cars in NYC surviving? Clearly they don't need a car. Just because someone has a car doesn't mean they need it. Compared to suburban life the need for a car is essentially eliminated. People still have landlines... doesn't mean we need landlines.

Pretty significant difference here. And it's interesting that multi-unit buildings have become more energy efficient while single family homes actually used more energy in 2009 than 1970. That doesn't count the ~300 gallons/yr of additional fuel used for households living outside cities.

@CyberGus put it best. The only way to protect Rural living is more cities or fewer people.

Urban living is fine. Rural living is fine.

Urban sprawl is destroying America.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

My favorite climate-denier trope is where they point out that C02 levels were higher than today several hundred million years ago.... and they fail to look up that most of the portions of the planet we like to live on were under water at that time since the ice caps were melted.

 

[ohmman]

Can we agree that it's not a simple "yes, they are, no they aren't" decision here? As with everything, there's nuance. City dwellers have access to, and therefore consume more exotic items that have a larger GHG impact. But they use less transportation fuel, offsetting that to some degree. Measuring the GHG impact of city dwellers typically leaves out the proverbial "long tailpipe" of emissions from the manufacturers of the goods they consume, but those are also shouldered by rural residents in lower quantities.

I would suggest that there's no definitive answer on this - we might have an inkling of which way the winds blow, and personally I suspect that a city resident has a lower carbon footprint compared to a rural resident like myself, but to argue about it as if there's a clear answer seems overconfident considering the limited data we have to really look at the question.

 

[ElectricIAC]

So how are the 55% of people without cars in NYC surviving? Clearly they don't need a car. Just because someone has a car doesn't mean they need it. Compared to suburban life the need for a car is essentially eliminated. People still have landlines... doesn't mean we need landlines.

Pretty significant difference here. And it's interesting that multi-unit buildings have become more energy efficient while single family homes actually used more energy in 2009 than 1970. That doesn't count the ~300 gallons/yr of additional fuel used for households living outside cities.


View attachment 856918

@CyberGus put it best. The only way to protect Rural living is more cities or fewer people.

Not everyone wants to live in a shitbox studio with communal bathrooms in a city that smells like sour milk.

 

[nwdiver]

I would suggest that there's no definitive answer on this

Pretty definitive that cities are part of the solution not the problem. Can you imagine the environmental cost if the 8M people living in NYC suddenly decided that a single family home with a white picket fence was a 'must have'?

And it seems a bit counter-productive that anyone that loves rural living would see cities as a problem. What makes rural rural is the glorious lack of people. Where do you think all those people are?

Not everyone wants to live in a shitbox studio with communal bathrooms in a city that smells like sour milk.

??? This is a 'shitbox studio'? Pretty sure it has its own bathroom and probably smells fine

 

[ElectricIAC]

Pretty definitive that cities are part of the solution not the problem. Can you imagine the environmental cost if the 8M people living in NYC suddenly decided that a single family home with a white picket fence was a 'must have'?



??? This is a 'shitbox studio'? Pretty sure it has its own bathroom and probably smells fine

View attachment 856921

Is that within reach of your average hourly worker though? There’s people working 2+ jobs who can barely afford the blind man special facing a brick wall….with roommates and or rent control.

 

[JRP3]

Can you imagine the environmental cost if the 8M people living in NYC suddenly decided that a single family home with a white picket fence was a 'must have'?

Imagine if the other 12M people in NYS living outside the city suddenly moved to the city? Why make ridiculous scenarios?

 

[nwdiver]

Imagine if the other 12M people in NYS living outside the city suddenly moved to the city? Why make ridiculous scenarios?

And that would be bad why? There's plenty of room to build up.

Can we at least agree that taller apartment building are preferable to more urban sprawl?