Transportation, Climate Change, and Compact Cities
The United States transportation system is the largest in the world and one of the main contributors to global greenhouse emissions and climate change. Carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, is the number one pollutant produced in the burning of oil. In Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emission from U.S. Transportation, David Green and Andreas Shaefer lay out two options for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and moving away from using products made from conventional oil.
The first option they present is instead of using conventional oil, producing the oil from “unconventional fossil fuels such as tar sands and shale oil” (Green & Shaefer, 2003). The second option presented was to move to a completely new form of energy like hydrogen from renewable energy or carbon sequestration (Green & Shaefer, 2003). Both options would require significant changes to our transportation system and economy. Green and Shaefer estimate that within 10 to 30 years, our society will start to shift away from conventional oil (2003).
The United States prides itself on having one of the largest transportation systems in the world and its mobility; Americans each year travel the equivalent of “a trip around the world” (Green & Shaefer, 2003). Americans are dependent on cars and drive everywhere. Urban sprawl is not helping them drive less. 10 to 30 years is a long time to start shifting away from the use of conventional oil. As an urban planner, I ask myself, what can be done in the planning field to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions?
Urban planners understand that residents who live in “compact neighborhoods” or “smart-growth neighborhoods”, meaning neighborhoods that are dense, mixed-used, with walkable streets, drive significantly less than residents in suburbs (Benfield, 2012). A recent study by Arizona’s Department of Transportation found that compact neighborhoods that are mixed-used, dense, and multimodal are less congested than other neighborhoods. These neighborhoods also have a lower average for vehicle miles traveled (2012). In compact mixed-use neighborhoods, residents are incentivized to walk and drive less. The more sprawled out a city is, the more people tend to drive and the denser a community is, the more people walk (Badger, 2014). By creating more compact neighborhoods we can incentivize walking and help reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
References:
Badger, Emily. (2014). Can compact cities help curb climate change?. The Huffington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/22/how-compact-cities-help-curb-climate-change/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.96255267b640
Benfield, Kaid (2012). Could Density Actually Reduce Traffic?. City Lab. https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2012/06/could-density-actually-reduce-traffic/2219/ Greene,
David & Shaefer, Andres (2003). Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emission from U.S. Transportation. Pew Center on Global Climate Change. https://globalchange.mit.edu/sites/default/files/PewCtr_MIT_Rpt_Schafer.pdf
Written by: Sofia Alvarez-Castro
Edited by: Sophie Appell
The first option they present is instead of using conventional oil, producing the oil from “unconventional fossil fuels such as tar sands and shale oil” (Green & Shaefer, 2003). The second option presented was to move to a completely new form of energy like hydrogen from renewable energy or carbon sequestration (Green & Shaefer, 2003). Both options would require significant changes to our transportation system and economy. Green and Shaefer estimate that within 10 to 30 years, our society will start to shift away from conventional oil (2003).
The United States prides itself on having one of the largest transportation systems in the world and its mobility; Americans each year travel the equivalent of “a trip around the world” (Green & Shaefer, 2003). Americans are dependent on cars and drive everywhere. Urban sprawl is not helping them drive less. 10 to 30 years is a long time to start shifting away from the use of conventional oil. As an urban planner, I ask myself, what can be done in the planning field to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions?
Urban planners understand that residents who live in “compact neighborhoods” or “smart-growth neighborhoods”, meaning neighborhoods that are dense, mixed-used, with walkable streets, drive significantly less than residents in suburbs (Benfield, 2012). A recent study by Arizona’s Department of Transportation found that compact neighborhoods that are mixed-used, dense, and multimodal are less congested than other neighborhoods. These neighborhoods also have a lower average for vehicle miles traveled (2012). In compact mixed-use neighborhoods, residents are incentivized to walk and drive less. The more sprawled out a city is, the more people tend to drive and the denser a community is, the more people walk (Badger, 2014). By creating more compact neighborhoods we can incentivize walking and help reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
References:
Badger, Emily. (2014). Can compact cities help curb climate change?. The Huffington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/22/how-compact-cities-help-curb-climate-change/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.96255267b640
Benfield, Kaid (2012). Could Density Actually Reduce Traffic?. City Lab. https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2012/06/could-density-actually-reduce-traffic/2219/ Greene,
David & Shaefer, Andres (2003). Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emission from U.S. Transportation. Pew Center on Global Climate Change. https://globalchange.mit.edu/sites/default/files/PewCtr_MIT_Rpt_Schafer.pdf
Written by: Sofia Alvarez-Castro
Edited by: Sophie Appell
Awesome post, Sofia! I think the idea of compact neighborhoods is great, it could not only decrease VMT and carbon emissions but encourage residents to be active. My only concern is that although VMT will be decreased for residents, the majority of residents in these neighborhoods still own cars. From my experience, my friends and colleagues who live in high-density areas of Portland and Seattle still own cars, although they only drive them on weekends. They complain that parking cars in these areas is difficult and they can spend up to 25 minutes alone looking for parking. Spending this much time looking for parking produces a significant amount of carbon emissions. I am wondering if it would be possible for people who live in these neighborhoods to store their cars outside of their compact neighborhoods and they could take the bus (or an Uber or Lyft) to access their cars on weekends. This would eliminate the stress of looking for parking and decrease their total carbon emissions.
ReplyDeleteAwesome insights as a planner. I totally agree -- 20 minute neighborhoods seem to be such a great and viable solution. I think multi-nucleated metropolitan regions with a light rail system connecting in between would solve a lot of the need for auto-mobile travel. That also gives society time to shift away from cars. At a seminar on transportation recently, I learned that most people who don't ride transit simply have a fear of taking the first step, and the same idea goes for biking. Some efforts by behavioral psychologists though are aimed towards making it an identity definer. "I take public transit or bike to work" and then met with "oh so you're a green/healthy commuter!" I don't necessarily think it's the greatest solution, but it's a start in shifting old mentalities.
ReplyDelete