A blasphemous post by humanscalecities, whom you should follow now.
Eco-cities have appeared for some time as the promise to bring sustainability to cities. They are presented as integrated projects to construct Utopian spaces for the development of a new inhabitable areas that fully comply with the requirements of reduced CO2 emissions (zero emissions), and less waste (zero waste), etc. They embody an optimistic vision (an urban structure can be built which is capable of sustaining itself and maintaining a systematic balance in its ecological operations) but also a pessimistic vision (sustainability is impossible to achieve in an already constructed city and it is not worth making an effort to solve the unsustainable current urban model). Some internationally well known cases can be found, such as Masdar or Dongtan (the latter city, suspected of only being propaganda), presented as mega-projects, and others on a smaller scale in urban regeneration processes, such as the well known case of Hammarby Sjöstad (eco-neighbourhoods), and in all cases they are built on a sustainable ideal. The Manual for the eco-cities project in Europe, result of the Eco-city project, is a good guide to understand how this type of action is interpreted, although this case above all refers to a neighbourhood scale.
In the newly published book by Earthscan, Building for a climate change. The Challenge for Construction, Planning and Energy, I have found a very critical chapter with the current boom in eco-cities (or eco-towns) as an integrated urban development, based on sustainability criteria. The chapter (Eco-towns: opportunity or oxymoron) focuses on justifying how the British authorities have systematically rejected this kind of projects. In an important debate held almost two years ago (limited to the British case, but of general interest), Simon Jenkins, a journalist specialized in urban and architectural subjects at The Guardian, stated clearly where the problem lies and closed a comprehensive article (Eco-towns are the greatest try-on in the history of property speculation) with a particularly scathing comment: “Building new houses emits 4.5 times more carbon than rehabilitating old ones, new eco-towns are a big failure”. Dermot Finch, director of the Centre for Cities wrote similar arguments some days later in Eco-towns are not the answer to climate change or housing needs and even Richard Rogers himself replied in the same newspaper, supporting these critical approaches and suggesting that the authorities should give up the idea of supporting the construction of a series of eco-cities in the country. Despite this controversy, finally at the end of 2009 the British government supported the construction of four eco-towns, with the opposition, among others, of the Campaign to Protect Rural England.
- lethlie likes this
- tashula reblogged this from radarqnet
- radarqnet reblogged this from humanscalecities and added:
- adrdem reblogged this from humanscalecities
- adrdem likes this
- spaceandshape reblogged this from humanscalecities
- ive-got-dreams-to-remember reblogged this from humanscalecities
- urbantick likes this
- sempreavanti-senzapaura likes this
- thisriver likes this
- tgabor reblogged this from humanscalecities
- roomthily likes this
- thewherefores likes this
- joanneofearth likes this
- jameswong reblogged this from humanscalecities
- dudetteslife likes this
- wemakebelieve likes this
- climateadaptation said: blasphemy!
- infinite-tandrra likes this
- climateadaptation reblogged this from humanscalecities and added:
- suzydickie likes this
- eme3blog reblogged this from humanscalecities
- majorich likes this
- humanscalecities posted this