There’s a good article in the Oct 18th issue of The New Yorker by David Owen called “Green Manhattan”. It’s about the environmental economies of scale that arise from the unique level of density in Manhattan. Owen presents a cogent argument that New York City, per capita, is the greenest city in America: people walk, bike, and subway instead of driving. The density means everyone’s energy bills are lower because apartment buildings are so much more energy efficient than individual homes. Manhattan’s geography altogether prevents parking lots and sprawl (he compares it to Houston).

Under his argument, a city with lots of green space (ala. Washington DC) is technically a bad thing—it creates a barrier between people and it spreads the city out more, making bikes and public transit less effective. Wide roads (DC) induce people to drive more while narrower ones (NYC) encourage public transit use.

I believe people need green space for their own sanity, and while he may be right about the barriers they create, he should consider the stressed-out New Yorker’s need to breathe and be in nature (however artificial) once in a while. New York is so dirty on the street level, it’s only when you step back that the environmental benefits become clear.

And there is the possibility—though we can’t rely on it—of much cleaner long-distance personal transportation in the future. Simply using energy to get around is not necessarily a bad thing: if we could drive around on wind power alone, we’d be just fine. The problem is that the production and delivery of energy is such a destructive and inefficient process today.

Check it out if you get a chance.