The Sustainable City

In class we learnt about a website, walkscore, that allows you to determine the “walkability” of your neighbourhood. So I thought I would determine how walkable some of the neighbourhoods are that I have lived in. I grew up in Northern Alberta, and lived on an acerage, making getting anywhere dependant on vehicle transportation. I then moved to Edmonton to go to College.



First we’ll start with where I currently live in Victoria. I live in Langford, in between the box stores and Goldstream Ave. This area receives a walkscore of 66, and is considered somewhat walkable. I would have thought that the walkscore would have been higher for this area, but the walk to the amenities on Goldstream is a little over 10 minutes, and the site calculates a walk score based on what amenities are available within a 10 minute walk.

Langford, Victoria, BC
http://maps.google.ca/maps

Next we’ll move on to where I lived while I attended NAIT in Edmonton. I lived two and a half blocks from campus in a residential neighbourhood, and about 6 blocks from Kingsway Garden Mall. This area received a walk score of 48, and is considered car dependant. While living there, I walked to school everyday (yes even in the couple of -40°C days), walked to the mall to go to work, and after college, walked to work at the wedding rental store. The only time I ever drove anywhere was once a week to get groceries. Even if the grocery store was closer, I probably still would have driven, just because I can, and carrying all the groceries is not pleasant.



From here, lets look at where my parents live in Stony Plain, AB. They live 15 minutes outside of town, in a nice little subdivision. They get a walkscore rating of 0, and are considered to be car dependant, which they most definitely are. But this is expected, as there are no amenities around them. 

Stony Plain, AB
http://maps.google.ca/maps



This is the case as well for where I grew up in Peace River, AB. We lived on an acreage outside of town, making it completely car dependant. I think growing up in Alberta, in a lifestyle that required the use of a vehicle has made me very reliant on my car. Even though I have amenities within walking distance of my current residence, I still don’t walk anywhere. I feel that driving is an ingrained habit within me from childhood. 

Peace River, AB. The Red "x" is where I grew up outside of town
http://maps.google.ca/maps

Communities within Alberta are not designed to be walking friendly. Everything is spread out across the community, and the areas that are walkable, such as Whyte Ave in Edmonton, you need some mode of transportation to get there in the first place. I have travelled to England, and we did not have a vehicle to get around the various towns while we were there. We did use the train and buses to get between towns, but once there, a car was not needed. Getting around London was a breeze with access to the underground, and once we got to where we want to be, we walked EVERYWHERE. Not just because we didn’t  have a vehicle, but because it was easy to get where we wanted to go be it the grocery store, shopping, or to a pub. Being an older city, I fell that it was designed with that purpose in mind; access to amenities in just a short few minute walk. I think that aspect makes a city more sustainable. Another example is Buenos Aires. My parents were there for two weeks, and said that they were able to walk everywhere. There were so many streets that met up with each other, cut in between buildings, that it was very easy to get where you needed.
 

Buenos Aires, Argentina
http://maps.google.ca/maps



London, UK
 http://maps.google.ca/maps



In the future, I think more cities, and new neighbourhoods need to be designed with that in mind; all major amenities within walking distance. Rather than building an area in a block formation, build it in the old style, with many small street that interconnect, and create “shortcuts” to get places. I think that may help to break the driving habit of some Albertans. Albertans do seem to have the mentality that they want their own space. So perhaps a city designed like the old European or South American cities would not work.

Powering the Sustainable City

Communities are currently being powered by the consumption of non-renewable resources. The majority of our power is provided by the burning of coal, and natural gas. We know that the action of burning of these natural resources is contributing to global climate change, by releasing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The power produced powers communities around the world, the majority of which are not considered to be sustainable cities. If we are to move to sustainable development, and the creation of sustainable cities, the one thing that we need to do is move away from the consumption of energy produced by coal and natural gas, and begin to use renewable natural resources such as wind power, for the production of our energy.



Image obtained from:
http://pubs.pembina.org/reports/FITariffs_Primer.pdf



The Pembina Institute has produced a series of fact sheets explaining the new policies and technologies that would bring renewable energy to the forefront. They state that “renewable energy can create jobs and new industries, and improve air and water quality, energy security, access to energy, and community development”. If this is the case, why have we not taken the initiative to begin using renewable natural resources, such as wind, in order to power our communities? I feel that the answer to this is that it is in part due to the new introduced costs associated with the implementation of new power sources, as well as the fact that it is a large change. As a society, we seem to resist change.

More information about Renewable Energy can be obtained from the Pembina Institute Website at: http://www.pembina.org/re .

Sustainability and Communities

“ One can more likely cause an effect at a fine scale, whereas success is more likely to be achieved at a broad scale” – Forman (1995)

“[it is] at the community scale that the application of innovation, both technological and social occurs most effectively, and, when aggregated, has the greatest impact in increasing sustainability” – Dale, Lind, and Newman (2010)

I feel that both of the quotes are correct in what they are saying. It is easy for one person to make a change towards sustainability, however it is more difficult to gain success at a larger scale, such as world wide. It appears that changes towards sustainability are most effective at a community scale. A community can be considered to be a group of people living in a particular area, common ownership, or a group of interdependent organisms inhabiting the same region and interacting with each other.

 For example, the city of Curitiba, Brazil, has recreated the development of the urban landscape and created a sustainable city (http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/jaime_lerner_sings_of_the_city.html).

Another example of a sustainable community is the Kootenay Grain Community Supported Agriculture program (http://www.kootenaygraincsa.ca/). It is a grain community supported agriculture project. It consists of a group of farmers in the Kootenay Region of BC who work together to create a sustainable grain supply to the region. It is supported by the community by selling shares to consumers, and divvying up the resulting harvested grain crop. The carbon footprint of grain production is greatly reduced, and the farmers are guaranteed a fair income for their crops.

http://www.kootenaygraincsa.ca/images/file/Express20091021.pdf

These are just two examples of how sustainability can be achieved at a community level. They both represent peoples will and success to make a change towards a more sustainable world.

Overpopulation of Overconsumption

I recently completed my ecological footprint online at http://myfootprint.org/en/. If everyone in the world were to live the way I currently live my lifestyle (generally 4-5 flights per year, drive my car everywhere I go alone, do not use low flow toilets or water faucets, etc.) we would need 4.57 Earths. To me this indicates that I am currently living a life style of over consumption in certain aspects.

The below figure shows that compared to the country average, my footprint in global acres by consumption for carbon, and housing is below the country average. I am, however, about par with the country average for food footprint and goods and services footprint.

The website provides some recommendations to reduce my footprint. While living in Victoria, I feel that I could reduce my food footprint by eating more local, organic, and in season foods, shop at local farmers markets, and choose foods with less packaging. I could also reduce my carbon footprint by not driving to school, and riding my bike instead. As far as reducing my goods and services footprint, there currently is not alot that I can do. In our house, we already recycle all of our paper, plastic, aluminum and glass. I don’t have any waste electronics, as I tend to use them until they die. Composting is currently not an option, as it would have to be a household decision, which would not happen. As far as purchasing recycled products, at this stage in my life, I am not purchasing many goods, other than food.

The world’s populations is rapidly growing in developing regions of the world, showing that there is a chance for overpopulation. With regards to a sustainable world, there is a Population/Consumption Paradox: Population can only be controlled by increasing education (mainly for women) and affluence. However, both of these will increase individual consumption.

I feel that as part of education, we can educate the world about making smarter choices to decrease ones ecological footprint (as represented by my example). This in turn would possibly reduce the increase of individual consumption.

I don't think that it is an issue of overpopulation OR over consumption, but rather a combination of the two. The greater the population increase, the greater the level of consumption will be.