Should cities be made more eco-friendly?
This post was written by a student. It has not been fact checked or edited.
Cities are some of the most carbon-consuming places in the world. Their size and immense population ( Tokyo has a population of 39 million! ) means that carbon footprints climb quickly. However, some cities have started to get greener.
Cities take up so much carbon that it's kind of a no brainer to reduce their emissions. In 2015 Seoul, the capital of South Korea, produced 276.1 metric tons of CO2. That's enough to boil 3944285 kettles! Transporting some of that energy into sustainable equivalents would mean saving masses of CO2.
On the other hand, cities have already established good and stable connections with national grids. Changing this would throw public transport into brief disarray, which would affect millions of people, as some wouldn't be able to go to work. It's a good idea to slowly shift to green energies, but is it good to do it immediately.
So, what do you think? Yes or no? Why or why not?
Comments (8)
Absolutely! Cities should be made more eco-friendly. Being eco-friendly means doing things that help protect the environment and reduce pollution. Here are three reasons why making cities eco-friendly is important:
1. It helps the environment: By adopting eco-friendly practices, cities can reduce their carbon footprint and protect natural resources such as water and air from pollution. For example, planting trees in urban areas can help purify the air by absorbing pollutants.
2. It benefits people's health: Pollution from cars and factories can harm people's health. By making cities more eco-friendly, people can breathe cleaner air and have access to green spaces for exercise and relaxation.
3. It saves money: Adopting eco-friendly practices can save cities money in the long run. For example, using solar panels to generate electricity can reduce energy costs over time.
I think going to green energies slowly is a better idea. This is because;
Green energies are more costly to set up compared to the commonly used fossil fuel. Moving to green energy sources too quickly could cause an upsurge in energy costs for both businesses and consumers which could be economically damaging.
Green energy sources like solar and wind power are intermittent, meaning they generate electricity only when the sun is shining or the wind is blowing. This creates a need for energy storage solutions to ensure a stable supply of electricity, which is still in the process of being developed. Rushing the transition to green energy could create instability in the energy grid if the energy storage solutions are not yet sufficient.
A rapid shift to green energy would require strong political will, which may not be present in all countries. A gradual transition could allow for more time to build public support for green energy policies and to encourage more countries to join the effort to reduce carbon emissions.
A rapid shift to green energy could result in job losses in the traditional fossil fuel industry, which could cause economic disruption and social unrest. A gradual transition could allow time for workers to retrain and for new green energy jobs to be created, which would help to mitigate the impact on the labour market.
Moving to green energy sources requires a significant investment in infrastructure, such as building new power plants and installing solar panels and wind turbines. This takes time, and rushing the process could lead to mistakes or sub-optimal solutions.
The transition to green energy in cities is undoubtedly a crucial step towards reducing carbon emissions and mitigating the effects of climate change. However, the approach and pace of this transition must be carefully considered to balance the benefits with the potential disruptions to urban life. Here are some points to consider:
Yes, transition to green energy:
Environmental Benefits: Shifting to sustainable energy sources in cities significantly reduces carbon emissions and improves air quality, thereby positively impacting public health and the environment.
Long-term Cost Savings: Investing in renewable energy infrastructure may initially involve costs, but in the long run, it can lead to substantial savings due to reduced reliance on fossil fuels and volatile energy prices.
Technological Advancements: Transitioning to green energy fosters innovation and the development of new technologies, creating job opportunities and driving economic growth in the renewable energy sector.
No, immediate transition challenges:
Disruption to Infrastructure: Swiftly transitioning to green energy could disrupt existing infrastructure, including national grids and transportation systems. This could lead to temporary disarray and inconvenience for millions of people who rely on these systems.
Energy Reliability: Ensuring a stable and reliable energy supply during the transition phase is crucial. Sudden changes may pose challenges in maintaining consistent energy access for urban populations.
Affordability and Equity: The cost of transitioning to green
1) Sorry about my typo in the third paragraph. I meant "It's a good idea to slowly shift to green energies, but it is not good to do it immediately".
My personal opinion is that cities should be made more eco-friendly. However, what I would do is place roof gardens and solar panels where it's possible to, and also focus on inventing new ways to make renewable energy. For example, BlueOrigin has figured out a way to put solar panels on the Moon without flying in other resources. This is great for the world because the whole surface of the moon could be filled up. Although that's not going to happen in reality, there are 14.6 million square miles of surface on the moon. Even if half of that was used, that's 7.3 million square miles of solar energy. Renewable sources like these are a brilliant idea and should be furthered as much as possible.
I am also an advocate for using the space of a city as effectively as possible. Massive rooves of skyscrapers remain bare, when they could be thriving with plant life. Some sides of buildings which don't have windows could be covered with solar panels. All these considerations should be taken into account.
However, I do not think that the energy already produced elsewhere should go to cities if it's already going to one place. If we build more, then sure, connect them to cities, but turning plants into city-energy producers could briefly destabilize National Grids. As I've said in the standpoint, even a brief disarray could be terrible.
Also, I think that we should be focusing on reducing the carbon emissions. Cities produce so much CO2 that just cutting down on the emissions from factories is less resource-costly than building whole new wind farms and other stuff like that.
Yes, we should try to make the cities eco-friendly. But the problem isn't to make it eco-friendly it is how to make it an eco-friendly city. An eco-friendly city is one designed to address social, environmental and economic impact through urban planning and city management and to make an eco-friendly city we will need to adopt the system of using solar panels, building with natural building materials and adapt to the use of " reduce, reuse and recycle" etc...
I definitely think that cites should be more eco friendly but I feel like when they make something eco friendly and it is released to the public I don’t think they actually take it seriously.
Yes! I think that there should be more eco-friendly cities. Being eco-friendly is a great way to change climate change. and you may be thinking," Huh, why is being eco friendly so great?" Well, I'll answer that question.
Why is being eco-friendly so important? An eco-city provides health benefits to its residents without using up more renewable resources than it produces, and without producing more waste than it can make. Therefore, eco-cities are way less harmful. Cities are a major cause of environmental change and a major contributor to climate change, as they are responsible for around 75% of global greenhouse gas emissions. In big amounts, greenhouse gasses cause the earth to heat up to a temperature that it shouldn't be, otherwise known as climate change.
What would happen to the earth if no one was eco friendly? Well if no one was to be eco friendly and everyone used fossil fuels and didn't try to save the planet, Extinctions would be happening faster than ever. food supply, and economies would crumble. Also air pollution can directly contaminate the surface of bodies of water and soil. so that can kill crops or reduce their amount. It can kill young trees and other plants. so if we didn't have food nor water we would soon become extinct causing glitches in oil refineries and nuclear plants would go unchecked, likely resulting in massive fires, nuclear explosions and devastating nuclear fallout. Our cities will crumble, our fields will overgrow and our buildings and bridges and pretty much every man-made thing will crumble and fall.
What would happen to the climate if everyone stopped being eco-friendly? If this were to happen, the planet is likely to see global temperatures rise by about 3-7 °F by the end of the century.
Cities who reduce their risk of climate effects and other naturally occurring disasters will see less property damage, insurance losses and even casualties, making sustainable city practices a necessity for long-term success.
The ecocity provides healthy abundance to its inhabitants without consuming more (renewable) resources than it produces, without producing more waste than it can assimilate, and without being toxic to itself or neighboring ecosystems.
Today, they have an increasingly central role in tackling climate change mitigation and adaptation, ecosystem preservation and restoration and circular economy. In addition, the presence of accessible, high-quality green spaces in cities supports physical and mental health and social well-being.
Some advantages of sustainable development are as follows: It helps in ensuring a better life for present and future generations. Lowers the impact on the environment by reducing air, water, and soil pollution. Helps in achieving long-term economic growth.
The pros of choosing green living are clear: more sustainable living, reduced climate change, and establishing better habits and creating a healthier home for future generations on planet Earth.
Being eco friendly means living in a way that is not harmful to the environment. This way of life is becoming increasingly important, as we need to protect our planet from man-made damage.
The aim of being eco-friendly include social progress and equality, environmental protection, conservation of natural resources and stable economic growth. Everybody has the right to a healthy, clean and safe environment. This can be achieved by reducing pollution, poverty, poor housing and unemployment.