I would be more likely to live in a city with more options of public transportation, like more frequent, trams and more skytrains. Some additional things that could be added are more frequent buses on busy routes, additional skytrain lines that service busier parts of the city, and electric trams that service smaller neighbourhoods. This could give people options to take public transit rather than driving to somewhat farther areas within their city and take another car off the road.

Did you know only 25% of 5-17 year olds in Canada use active modes of transportation. This is why it is really important to use transportation as much as you possibly can because only 1/4 kids do. Just think of how much gas gets put in the air in one day and how much you and the people around you can prevent that. You can't change everyones carbon footprint but you can change yours so use that opportunity and use it to your advantage to try and save our earth!

I agree with this as ,riding a bike or even walking to school your helping out the ecosystem by not using as much gas as you would be if you were driving. Even taking the bus is good and that's a good way for transportation as well. But imagine how much you can help out just by doing the smallest things can help make a good impact on our environment.

Hi this can help make a Sustainable

edit sing is single sorry

I agree because single use plastic will just turn into micro-plastic and stay in the air

I agree stop using single use plastic. It very much effects our environment as it is only "single use" using reusable water bottles such as Hydro Flask might cost more but wont cost more then thousands of single use plastic material. Don't use single plastics!

I agree with ethlou, Single use plastics are so bad and dangerous. When we are done with them we just chuck them in the garbage not thinking of the consequences. They can end up in the ocean and hurt our sea life or end up in a landfill and never break down. If Single use plastics end up in the ocean some of them could get caught around animals necks or fins and cause them to suffocate or die. Animals in the ocean could also confuse plastic as food which could make them very sick and/or cause animals to suffocate from the inside. If plastics do break down, they could turn into microplastics which are also very harmful in similar and different ways. Microplastics have been found to cause heart attacks, health affects and even death. Instead of using single use plastics we should use reusable water bottles, wooden cutlery, beeswax wrap instead or Saran Wrap (yes this more expensive, but you can reuse them multiple times so in the end you end up saving money.) And if you do end up using single use plastics try to recycle them properly so the can be reused in a different way.

i think nina is correct single use plastics are very bad for the environment and getting rid of them would genuinely not even be that difficult to do. All you have to do is be careful about what we buy a lot of things have single use plastic containers but as long as you take a moment to look wether or not you can recycle the plastic. This seems like one of the easier things to drop for most people and it is very important too. single use plastic is incredibly bad for the environment because it does not break down really at all and therefore they can kill many, many animals every year especially in the ocean which is already in bad shape because of ocean acidification.

use more public transport  and increase car sharing.

I agree, but I suggest walking or biking instead of driving because burning fossil fuels release a large amount of carbon dioxide (CO2). If you're going somewhere far, then that's when it is suggested taking public transportation and carpooling. If you're planning on buying a car, then consider buying an electric one with cheaper models. Even though electric cars run on electricity produced from fossil fuels, they reduce the amount of air pollution as well as causing fewer greenhouse gas emissions.

I feel like I have a lot of everyday purchases especially food so if we all cut down on our everyday purchases like food or stuff that we don't need but want like toys or video games (physical copies) then our carbon emissions would go way down as well we would have more food to help out other countries that may be struggling with hunger and we would also have more toys to donate to struggling families.

Instead of putting out more carbon emissions in the air we could start to bike to destinations rather than driving for a minute and a half to get there.

I think that I should start doing this more I usually take public transportation

I completely agree that that is such an easy and affordable fix. I think a big reason our society doesn’t just all bike is how lazy people are getting. People eat so much fast food and don’t exercise enough to balance. This is a big problem and personally I am trying to walk/ bike more often when possible. Cars that are gas powered produce so much carbon and it’s pretty easy and it saves so much money to not drive often.

I think a great way cities can reduce their carbon footprint is installing mandatory solar panels. Solar panels are really easy to install and once done produce very limited amounts of carbon. To start off solar panels could just power lights and small appliances. As the solar panel technology gets more advanced they can start to be the main energy source for heating, cooling and now major appliances as well. Once we get to this energy saving form of electricity, the world will burn way less fossil fuels, reducing the amount of carbon in the atmosphere.

Make sustainable city is easy ? Why it's difficult ?

yes

Cold Fusion, or low-energy nuclear reaction (LENR) is basically a hypothesized type of nuclear reaction that should occur at room temperature. There is currently no widely accepted theoretical model that would allow cold fusion to occur.

Theoretically, it should provide virtually LIMITLESS energy and minimal nuclear waste, and pretty much no environmental impact compared to, say, fossil fuels.

See, current nuclear power plants use nuclear fission (not fusion), which, as the name suggests, consists of splitting heavy atoms (such as uranium-235 or plutonium-239) into smaller fragments, which releases a large amount of energy. The problem is, along with energy, fission also produces additional neutrons and radioactive fission products.

These radioactive fission products are typically unstable isotopes of elements such as cesium strontium, iodine, and plutonium. These isotopes decay and emit radiation in the form of alpha, beta, and gamma particles. Some of these isotopes can remain for thousands to millions of years.

Cold fusion, on the other hand, is a nuclear reaction which is quite frankly the opposite of fission. It involves two like atomic nuclei (often involving hydrogen isotopes such as deuterium and tritium) merging together to form a heavier nucleus (helium nuclei), releasing a significant amount of energy in the process. he energy released is due to the conservation of mass into energy, described in Einstein’s famous equation, E=mc^2, because if you look at the mass of the reactants and compare it to the mass of the product, you’ll find that its not equal, which means some of the mass has been transferred into energy.

The reason this occurs is because the speed of light (c) is a very large number, even the smallest of mass could theoretically be converted into a large amount of energy. This process occurs at near room temperature. This low energy requirement reduces harmful nuclear byproducts. Hydrogen isotopes are also relatively lighter than nuclear fission reactants, and therefore should generate more stable elements.

If we can somehow harness this release of energy, it could be a potential source of clean and abundant form of energy, proving to be superior to the fossil fuel and nuclear fission energy we use today…

(if ya read all of that congrats u officially don't have the attention span of a 6 year old yayyy)

.

This is true, I agree.

I completely agree because E=MC2 is one of the most famous equations developed by albert einstein and this is completly true. The speed of light squared is actualy about 9 times 10 to the 16 power m per second which just shows how much limitless energy we can get.

Yes, but what is the cost of doing such things, and how would we go about doing this? Would the practice methods be sustainable?

I love this and I completely agree! I am someone who is highly interested in nuclear physics and the use of nuclear power (which is why I have 235 in my username), and it's always great to see others take an interest in it as well. It's disappointing that a lot of people tend to shy away from anything that involves the word nuclear since they immediately equate it to being disastrous. The use of nuclear power, especially cold fusion, is very interesting and I think that if more people took the time to learn about it we would be more open to using it.

lmao i was pleasantly surprised when my post from half a year ago got a reply

Converting to energy-efficient buildings offers significant economic value both in the short and long term. Energy-efficient buildings reduce operational costs by lowering energy consumption, leading to substantial savings on electricity, heating, and cooling. This reduction in utility expenses can offset initial investments in energy-saving technologies like better insulation, energy-efficient windows, and smart lighting systems. Additionally, energy-efficient buildings often increase property values and attract tenants or buyers who prioritize sustainability, creating a competitive advantage in the real estate market. On a broader scale, reducing energy demand also alleviates pressure on power grids and reduces the need for expensive infrastructure expansions. Government incentives and tax breaks for adopting energy-efficient technologies further enhance the financial appeal of this conversion, making it a smart economic choice for both individuals and businesses.

https://www.energy.gov/eere/energy-effi … 0Champion.

I understand that people love living in big homes and having a mansion of their own, but let's be realistic, no one needs a house that big for one person or even a whole family unless you bring an entire city with you. It's a waste of resources and basically living space. It's even expensive, so here's what I suggest, we can do compact living and only live with what we need, that was we'd always have money saved, our house would be easier to manage, and we wouldn't be raising our footprints so much. And I know some may say that a studio apartment can be much more expensive than normal housing, but that comes down to the person and how far they're willing to go to search for sustainable housing and something within their means. Not above it.

I 100% agree with this and how compact living would lower our carbon footprints drastically. Now, I'm not going to say everyone needs to change the way they live to complete minimalism; however, I feel if people lived with a minimal amount of devices and avoided living in excessively large spaces, there would be a large decrease in resource use and our carbon footprints.

I also agree on this matter, a lot of land and habitats have been cleared for big houses to only house one or two people only for the house to end up being abandoned and left there for years or even decades. It is undoubtedly a waste of resources.

Although you may think that public transit can give off more carbon due to things like trains and subways being much bigger than the average car, that is actually not the case. Especially with big family cars like S.U.V.s, the standards car companies have to meet is much lower than the criteria that average public transit has to follow. Public Transit is made to have their vehicles emit less and less carbon every year, something that most companies do not follow. According to newyorker.com, car companies are able to classify S.U.V.s as trucks, making it so the window of carbon they are allow to emit is much larger than the average car. To conclude, yes more public transit is a solution to help stop climate change of carbon emissions.

I never knew that fact about SUVs and I'm also glad that you included a cited source as well. People should switch to public transit or at least try to find a more sustainable means of traveling. If cities were more walkable, we wouldn't even have to worry much about transportation in general!

How much of an impact do highways have on the environment?

Taken from the FHWA:
In the United States today, traffic and roads are strongly implicated in many of the major environmental problems: air and water pollution, heavy energy use, fragmented farmland and habitat, wildlife and biodiversity losses, and disruption of ecological communities

While they can help us travel, they do contribute to major pollution. However, they do have solutions for animals being separated, with building highway crossings, such as the one below.

I believe that a great and fairly easy way to reduce carbon emissions in big cities is to make them more walkable. Some ways to do this are
-Lowering the speed limit
-Investing in public transportation
-Planting more trees and plants
-Maintaining sidewalks and crosswalks
-Making roads accessible for disabled people
These actions provide a very clear result, which is a less vehicle-dependent city, this can in turn lowers emissions and according to CNU, reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 4 tons a year. Not only does creating a walkable city make it more sustainable, but it also increases the health and even life span of residents.
https://www.cnu.org/publicsquare/2021/0 … t%20suburb.

I definitely agree. If you look at any large city in the US, it is built for cars, not for walking or biking. But if you look at many cities in Europe, it is quite the opposite. There are tons of people walking and biking, this was even the case for the US before automobiles became a "necessity" in our lives. While it is true that they are a quick form of transportation, it would be much more efficient and eco-friendly if we go back to streets that are made for people, not cars, and if we finally normalize HSRs in the US. Many well developed countries like Japan, Germany, France, and more, all do this.

Recycling Centers almost everywhere in the city

Why are sustainable cities important?
I think that sustainable cities have a great impact on enviroment.
In particular in the reduction of the emissions coming from factories and vehicles, and mostly about the emission caused by energy prodution from fossil fuels.

What do we mean with sustainable cities?
A sustainable city is a kind of city that focuses on reducing waste and emissions by using renewable energy and electric vehicles.

In conclusion i think that the future needs sustainable cities not only for our wellbeing but also for the future generations.

I would agree. Sustainable cities, along with the points you already mentioned, would raise awareness about climate change. Something I find particularly concerning is the variation in the CO2 levels. Just at my own school, CO2 concertation ranges between 450ppm and 850ppm, a different of almost 2 fold. When designing a city, I think it is important to ensure that a different area of the city doesn't suffer from one area "green" (eg. having factories all in one place, pollutes one area, but keep the rest clean)

I completely agree! Cities are one of the main contributors to carbon emissions (70%), and making them more sustainable would reduce CO2 substantively. In terms of transportation, I think that we could go even further than electric vehicles and have the main form of transportation be walking/biking. Since cities are pretty compact and everything is relatively close together, the majority of places could be accessed without even having to use a vehicle. Current cities can be pretty dangerous for bikers or pedestrians, so to encourage it in a sustainable city there could be certain streets or areas that don’t allow cars. I went to Portugal last Spring and there were barely any cars, many of the streets were just for walking, and you had to park your car outside of them and walk in. Not only would this be better for the environment, but getting more cardio would also improve people’s physical and mental health. (I do realize that walking would be an issue for people with disabilities, that would be a separate problem to figure out).
https://www.nrdc.org/issues/sustainable-cities#overview

To make the city more eco-sustainable, we should all use means of transport that do not pollute like bicycles as much as possible. These are excellent if you have short trips to make, but if the trips are longer it is better to avoid the car and take some public transport to reduce pollution.

I agree with this completely. I think that it would be amazing if more cities could incorporate opportunities for more eco-friendly transportation like biking and walking. In addition to eco-friendly transportation cities could even take it a step further and make buildings more sustainable to help conserve energy and water. Solar panels are a great addition to homes and buildings. My house has solar panels and 70% of our electricity/energy is generated from the sun. Not only is this eco-friendly, but it helps lower our electric bill each month. If more buildings used solar panels it would help the environment and be more cost efficient. Another thing that I think would be a great addition to buildings would be a water conservation system, complete with things like rain catching technologies (ex. rain basin). These technologies would be cost efficient and help to conserve water. The water caught by these technologies could be used for things like pluming. To sum it up, I think that eco-friendly transportation and also sustainable water and energy systems would help to lower a cities overall carbon footprint, and I think that more cities should start implementing these things to be more climate conscious.

I was shocked that my transportation (mainly air travel )took up more than HALF of my carbon footprint. I feel like the normalization of air travel undermines how harmful airplanes are to our atmosphere. According to the Environmental and Energy Study Institute, 70% of airplane exhaust is CO2, and after being emitted, 30% of that gas is naturally removed from the atmosphere over 30 years, 50% disappears within a few centuries, and 20% stays in the atmosphere for thousands of years. As air travel increases, I can't imagine how much unnecessary carbon would end up just because of planes. I think that we should stop normalizing unnecessary air travel and educate others about its detrimental impact on our atmosphere. Additionally, I think we should also stop normalizing the frequent use of private jets, and how we should stop turning a blind eye to celebrities like Taylor Swift's carbon footprint. The idea of using private jets to travel from place to place is unbelievable because how can you not start thinking about how much carbon you, a single person, contribute to damaging our atmosphere?

Use more public transportation so less individual pollution

I agree with your idea and I think it would help a lot to reduce the pollution, but in my opinion the vehicles in a lot of cities need to be "updated" to guarantee to all of us the possibility of being more eco friendly.

Sustainable cities are the notions of the future, cities that are delineated to manage the needs of environmental and lucrative impact for the world. Meaning, that these are urban cities that are managed by creating green areas, green neighborhoods, environmental infrastructure, and eco-friendly substitutes to our original ways. Usually, when sustainable cities are spoken about, we usually speak about public transportation, walkable and bikeable neighborhoods, solar panels and farms, green building and architecture, solving our food production processes, easily attainable public resources, the conservation of water, as well as waste management. However, have we ever gotten into the depth of these truly transformative ways to live?
Approximately 1,023 million metric tons of Carbon divide are produced just from U.S gasoline and diesel only. We are speaking about just one single country, one country, the United States. What about the other countries? Combined, this is enough to weaken and allow the carbon dioxide emissions to grow exponentially. 75% of carbon monoxide pollution is created by transportation. Sustainable cities have offered alternatives besides driving individual vehicles, such as metro systems, rail transport, and creating cycling or walkways. Metro systems are rapid transit trains that consist of several cars that are run on the multiple-unit system. Rail transit is one of the fastest forms of ground transportation, using locomotives powered by fuel or electricity. Investments in bike lanes and pedestrian pathways have been encouraged for a number of reasons. Among the most effective modifications that communities can implement to meet their sustainability, economic, and social objectives are walking and bicycling, active transportation, and the lowest carbon forms of transportation.
Green architecture promotes energy efficiency, reuse and security of building materials, the use of renewable energy sources, and their need to lower the negative environmental effects. For instance, buildings such as One Central Park in Sydney, Australia. Once Central Park has 35,000 green wall plants inside it. They prioritize saving and reuse wastewater for irrigation and waste. These smart designs ensure to create structures that benefit the environment and communities of the world. Tao Zhu Yin Yuan in Taiwan has an “Anti-Global Warming and Carbon-Absorbing Ecosystem” according to  Amazing Architecture.
We have time, we still do. So many years have passed and we state that we will do something but we usually don’t. If the world eventually burns out due to everything we have done, who will tell our story? We’re running out of time, we have a limit, so what can we still do? What can we do while we have more time? We may start fixing the globe by fixing the large cities where we reside and the ones that are often traversed by cars. Have we done enough yet? No, we haven't. We have to press forward. We are paving the path to reject waste and significant carbon emissions from the world we live in by creating sustainable cities.

No, the short and simple answer is no. Nothing we do is going to fix the Earth right away. The Earth is way too broken and harmed for simple and unnoticeable actions to be taken and for it to actually work at all. Cites contribute to a lot if not most of the pollution and climate change that causes harm to the earth. Sustainable cities can do a few things to help though, such as, using renewable resources, having lots of sidewalks, opting for a mass transportation system, and slowing down energy consumption.
Using renewable resources would really improve any area in the world, but definitely areas with mass amounts of people with energy surges like no other. Cities are notorious for using so much power and this would really improve the carbon footprint of cities if most cities could use renewable energy. While yes it can be very expensive to start and maintain, the benefits much outwardly outweigh the price.
Having lots of sidewalks, or bicycle trails give more opportunities for people to walk or bike places, rather than driving. While, this is not just a problem for cities, it also for people that live further out. If there are more places closer to where people are they wont need to drive, or better for the people who live farther out of town where it is not ideal to walk into town when need be they could opt for mass transportation, such as bus or carpooling. This also would help more if electric or fuel efficient vehicles were used.
Slowing down on energy consumption in cities could really help with their carbon footprints too. Not using as much energy could benefit by not having to make as much, whether that is by renewable resources or carbon resources. Just not using as much puts so much less carbon into the atmosphere, helping our carbon footprints decrease.

https://www.repsol.com/en/energy-and-th … dex.cshtml
https://www.thegef.org/what-we-do/topic … ble-cities

In a city like EcoCity, the focus would be on reducing carbon emissions and promoting a sustainable lifestyle. There would be a good public transportation system, like trains and electric buses, so people can move around easily without needing cars. Buildings would be energy-efficient and use renewable energy sources like solar power. There would be lots of green spaces and areas for recycling and composting. Living in EcoCity would mean having access to modern urban life while also caring for the environment.

Solar energy is a great way to bring down schools carbon footprint. By using solar energy we bring down carbon footprint by a lot. Granted, if we only use solar energy seven out of the 10 months when were at school it would still make a difference. For the other three months, we could use the same energy we use today in our school. According to Energy Sage, the benefits of putting solar panels in our environment is important because solar panels aren't just good for the environment, they can also provide serious savings. How much money you can save varies based on several factors including your location, current energy usage, the size of your solar panel system, and most importantly, the price you pay for electricity. For example, if you currently pay $150 a month for electricity, you’ll save about $65,000 over the next three decades. Most solar shoppers save between $20,000 and $96,000 on electricity over the lifetime of their solar panel system. In this article, we'll walk you through what you need to understand how going solar can save you money and how to figure out what your savings will be. There are a bunch of other ways that solar energy can help our school. Like how much they will reduce your carbon footprint. The significant financial returns are a compelling reason to invest in renewable energy, but money isn't the only thing solar panels save. When you install solar, you also reduce CO2 emissions by limiting your fossil fuel consumption. Thank you for reading and here is the site it used www.energysage.com.

In this city, imagine a network of pedestrian-friendly streets lined with bike lanes and green spaces, encouraging walking and cycling. Public transportation would be efficient, powered by renewable energy sources, and easily accessible to all residents. There would be an emphasis on mixed land use, with neighborhoods designed to reduce the need for long commutes. Renewable energy sources like solar panels and wind turbines would dot the landscape, providing clean power for homes and businesses. Waste management would prioritize recycling and composting, minimizing landfill waste. It sounds like a city designed for a sustainable future, and definitely a place I'd consider living in!

I agree, I would also consider to live in a sustainable city. People should rely on renewable energy sources like the examples you gave in your text. Our waste should be recycled, which can lessen landfill waste. Renewable energy sources should be accessible to all residents, like you said in your text. I hope that in the future, people could live in a greener city.

In my opinion,nature is our best friend and we need to protect it at all costs! A way to protect is planting more trees. Our city can be more sustainable and organized. The trees gathers the carbon dioxide, protecting us from its danger.

I believe that in order to be able to improve the cleanliness of my city, it is necessary to add as many trash cans as possible, each one for a certain category, either paper, or plastic, or cardboard, and that there are no more normal trash cans. In this way we make the work of garbage collectors easier.

There are many things we can do to make the city more sustainable, and we can start by reducing energy consumption at home by replacing regular light bulbs with LED ones and by using energy-efficient household appliances. We can also use public transport or a bicycle instead of a personal car to reduce pollution

In my opinion a way to reduce the carbon footprint in a city is by promoting renewable energy sources like wind or solar power.

I think one of the ways we can reduce the carbon footprint of a city is restricting the usage of old and polluting cars.

Use more public transportation so less individual transportation waste

you can save some heat, you can use some blankets to warm yourself instead to turn the heat to 25 degrees C

I agree it would be better to just get some more blankets rather than turning your heat up a lot. Also if you do have some blankets people should use those and turn their heat down cause I feel like a lot of people have the blankets and maybe even use them but don’t turn the heat down.

An electric car only produces about 200 grams of CO2, they are very efficient. Electric cars are also more expensive than the average gas car. The price is 17% higher for a new electric car than a gas car. A family is going to worry more about putting food on the table than buying a sustainable car especially if the price cost is higher. As these cars become more widespread the price of them may go down. The question is how can we make them more affordable now? Hybrid cars might be part of the solution. They are around the same cost as a gas powered car, but are much more efficient in burning fuel.

Although Sometimes it may seem to be easier to use a car, cars create so much carbon admission into our air, contributing a lot to climate change. Although sometimes using car might not be avoidable, trips that you could use other form of transportation that might be more sustainable would overall help reduce your carbon footprint. Especially in the city I live in I have lots of access to bike routes near me, making me more likely to chose biking to places  instead of going by car. Some places though might not have the access to safe bike routes, but they might have access to forms of public transit, like the bus, and or sky trains, which can also reduce carbon admissions. I think finding other ways of transportation can help us reduce carbon admissions into the air helping us create a more sustainable city.

I agree that your ideas would decently reduce carbon emittions but for most people not using their car is not a viable possibility, everyone taking way less planes would be a much more effective way to reduce carbon emittions.

The sustainability of a city comes down to the residents living within it. If promoted
enough, our city's health and well-being can become our top priority as citizens. Some ways that we can help the sustainability of our city are considering our energy use, promoting sustainable ideas to our communities, reducing, reusing, and recycling. These are just some ways we can make our environment a healthier and safer place. When I say promotion, I mean any form of eco-friendly public marketing. This could be via social media, through presentations to your community, or advertisements. Promoting new and healthy ideas is a different form of education than trying to change people's habits; like meat consumption. So instead of spreading ideas attempting to change people's lifestyles, we can bring awareness to small actions that we can take towards making our city a better place.

I agree. In order for our communities and cities to be a sustainable living space, people need to be informed and educated about the alternative options. This makes the chance greater for people actually able to act on the new ideas. People could create posters/flyers and hang them up places around town. One thing I would recommend a good sustainable option for people to actually act on is creating green spaces in communities. This could include things like planting trees (which are a great option to reduce carbon because they are carbon sinks), planting a garden etc. Or even other things like having a place in town where people could go and pick up reused materials to repurpose. All of these things require talking to people and educating them about these alternatives that are effective and worthwhile to implement.

Green roofs contribute sustainable energy to urban environments and also enrich the biodiversity of the area. Green roofs are said to improve the morals and hope in communities. Green roofs not only reduce the carbon emissions by over half a gigaton annually, but they also remake habitats that were destroyed from urban construction. Green roofs are very good steps in helping cities sustain themselves and help the environment.

I agree. Another big positive that green roofs is that they are very resilient to variations in conditions. They are proven to last a long time and stay effective during most of their lifetime.

A sustainable city is a smartly planned city that tries to meet people's needs without harming the environment. These cities make wise use of resources, such as eco-friendly building materials and renewable energy sources. They have excellent public transportation, a large number of green areas, and efficient recycling programs. The long-term preservation of nature and the improvement of living conditions for locals are the two main objectives. Sustainable cities encourage people to live well without endangering the environment by demonstrating how to do so.

More cities should become sustainable around the world. By using electric public transportation like buses, taxis and electric bikes/scooters. It would reduce the carbon emissions a lot.

Cities can encourage modes of transportation such as biking or scootering by giving roads bike lanes and encouraging bike/scooter rentals or shops. This would lower  the amount of cars used. This is important because cars contribute greatly to climate change, about 20%!

I agree with what you have said here. I would like to add on and say that if more people switched to electric instead of gas cars, air quality would get better and pollution would decrease a lot but also, if electric car companies made electric cars more cheaper, they could be more affordable as the reason a lot of people have gas cars is because they are cheaper and people can’t afford electric cars because of their price. Also I feel that a lot of people know about electric cars but don’t fully know how it would actually benefit our earth if they switched from gas to electric. Electric cars are also more quieter, so if you don’t like too much noise, an Electric car is the way to go!

I agree with this for cities and places where things people need are close together. In rural areas, people dont have the ability to do those things. However, there are electric cars that would help. The problem is that they are so expensive. Another thing that would help with man powered vehicles is weight problems. At least in America, 2/3 adults are overweight. This is a big problem in our country. In conclusion, if you are able to have a man powered vehicle that is great but an electric car works too.

One big step that we could take to make cities more sustainable is getting electric busses, taxis and trains in big cities could make a huge difference think of a big city near you and think of the huge amount of cars, taxis and busses all of those are emitting huge amounts of carbon and greenhouse gases but if taxis, busses and trains were electric than that would reduce the amount of emissions by a huge amount.

Greetings,

I am thrilled to share that Badajoz is pioneering an eco-conscious transformation within urban transportation by implementing a fleet of fully electric buses. This initiative positions Badajoz as a leader in ecological transportation efforts, setting a remarkable example for cities globally.

The introduction of electric buses brings forth numerous environmental advantages. These zero-emission vehicles contribute substantially to the reduction of air pollutants, offering residents a breath of fresher air and a step towards a more sustainable lifestyle. The quiet nature of electric buses also means a more peaceful urban environment, free from the rumble of diesel engines.

At my digital marketing company in Badajoz, we are inspired by Badajoz's commitment and have adopted our own green practices. Every team member is an active participant in our comprehensive recycling program. In harmony with the city's green vision, our offices are energized by solar power, harnessing the sun's sustainable energy to fuel our innovative marketing solutions.

By integrating these eco-friendly practices, we aim to not only minimize our environmental impact but also to contribute positively to the planet's well-being, mirroring the forward-thinking spirit of Badajoz.

Your Post
A sustainable city is important especially with the climate change issue because of all the greenhouse gases. Transportation is a big part of a cities carbon emissions, according to a post made by our world in data a train, walking, or biking are all the most efficient ways for low carbon transportation. Walking or biking is also a great way to do small workouts making for a healthier city.

https://ourworldindata.org/travel-carbo … o%20travel.

sustaining our city

I agree with what you're saying, if citizens make mire of an effort not to use their car, it can call for a better world with a decreasing amount of carbon. If people walk, bike, or take public transit to their nearby activities and work, instead of going by car it can be the first step you take to living an eco-friendlier lifestyle and cause for your city to grow more sustainable. On the counter point people may not live in a central enough area to bike, walk, or bus to their destinations. It can be time consuming and crowded and an environment that some don't feel is a good environment for them. nonetheless i think this is an easy step we can take to reduce the ongoing problem of our carbon footprint. In addition to this we can build and create more public green spaces that are accessible to the public. This is an extremely important action we can take. It can create community, allow people to have an excuse to go outside more often and overall have a crucial role to play in the sustaining of our cities.

In my ideal city, there would be a focus on more eco-friendly methods of transportation like biking and public transportation. Carbon emissions from driving are some of the highest, especially when most cars are powered by gas. To have more developed public transit systems across the globe, would bring down emissions significantly. Also in my city, I would like to be fully powered by renewable energy, like solar and wind. Fossil fuels are the biggest contributor to climate change, so to find alternatives would be incredibly beneficial to bringing down emissions. The rest of the world may never be the same as my ideal city, however, if we make strides to use more renewable energy and use eco friendly methods of transportation, it would make a big difference.

To help make the city more sustainable, the use of more public transport could be established so that people stop using their own vehicles so much to avoid air contamination.

I agree. Compared to cars, public transport saves us a lot less carbon being released into the air by taking a large group of people from one place to another and cars usually take an individual to their destination. However, many people find taking their cars much more convenient than walking, biking, and taking transit. The way I see it, cars are in many ways the easiest and fastest way to get around. The long-term impact this has on our environment makes me rethink this. The amount of carbon piling up in our atmosphere and in organisms is concerning, and carbon being released by cars all around the world isn't making this any better. For things to be convenient for everyone, walking and biking to nearby places and taking cars and public transit to farther destinations is a good way to help the environment.

I agree with this, there should be more public transportation but what if some people don’t feel comfortable with going in a bus or some sort of transportation with other people, some people have different comfort levels and being with people that they don’t know might not be normal for them. I think that there should be electric cars instead with a lowered price, around the same as a gas car because a lot of people have gas cars as they can’t afford electric ones.

I'm going to talk about how we can help make the world a more sustainable place. For first, we would have to eliminate or reduce plastic because it is one of the products that pollutes the planet the most, and find alternatives for things made of plastic. It is also very important to recycle our garbage and reuse. By using public transportation we help to reduce the pollution or using bicycles to go to nearby places. It is also good to eat ecologic foods that come from our earth and not buy everything processed. If all together contribute helping in somethings we can make the world more sustainable place.

As Peter Parker once said, “We always have a choice, it’s our choices that make us who we are, and we always have a choice to do what is right”. Most cars on the road right now run on oil/gas that come from burning fossil fuels. The burning and extraction of these fossil fuels causes a series of detrimental effects on our environment and contributes to climate change. Cars are held accountable for 1/5 of the total global warming pollution in the WORLD! So how can we resolve this issue….? Well, a good alternative to gas powered vehicles are hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. Hydrogen is one of the world’s most abundant elements. These cars can be produced from green hydrogen that is produced from renewable sources such as wind and solar. In hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, a chemical reaction between hydrogen and oxygen creates electricity, therefore powering the car, and the only byproduct is water! Not only are hydrogen vehicles more efficient and eco-friendly, they have a greater range, and are faster in refueling than most EVs. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are clearly the way to go!

Recycling is not straightforward, most cities use a single stream recycling system. That means that all recyclables are put together and contamination is much more common. This means that materials have to be sorted and non-recyclables need to be removed, this costs companies a lot of money and makes it unprofitable for business. Single stream recycling also contaminates materials that would otherwise not be contaminated making it unusable .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7N5a476DKQ

Would you want to live in a sustainable city? I know I would. But, what makes a city sustainable in the first place? Well, there are many factors that can make a city considered “sustainable.” If I controlled this city, some measures I would take to make this city sustainable is:
1. MORE EFFICIENT PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION reduces dependence on fuels that can harm the environment, “taking public transportation reduces CO2 emissions by 45%” (UCLA Transportation), improves air quality ( UCLA Transportation )
2. RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES such as wind and solar power: better air quality, reduce reliance on harmful fuels, does not produce greenhouse gas emissions. (Environmental Protection Agency
3. URBAN AGRICULTURE with the increasing population density (population per unit of land area) of urban areas, this can help: citizens meet food requirements, improve health, reduce cost of transportation (farm to consumer), better air quality… hence, reducing carbon emissions ( National Agriculture Library )
4. EFFECTIVE RECYCLING AND WASTE MANAGEMENT less need to use new raw materials from the Earth; reduced deforestation, reduced harming or displacing animals in the wild, less pollution. ( Friends of the Earth UK )

These measures would not only benefit the Earth but also the people, creating an improved, sustainable city.

The sustainability of a city depends on if the city has the ability to take care of all the basic necessities of all of the people in different parts of the city. With most of the focus of how a city is sustainable is of the urban infrastructure of the city as the use of renewable energy like wind and solar energy are integrated in the urban developments. This integration can cause the production of natural gas that can help give more heat and clean power to the city. A main and effective way that this can be implemented in urban development is adding green architecture. Making buildings have solar panels or wind turbines around cities. With Hydroelectric power sources like the Grand Coulee Dam being a big way to give large amounts of clean electricity. With that dam specifically, recorded at an annual amount of 21 billion kilowatt hours of electricity which is enough to power 2 million houses. Hydroelectric power is the largest renewable source of energy in the world right now with it even if being expensive upfront it will be beneficial in the long run as it will grow to be inexpensive and can meet peak electric demand. On top of large amounts of  electricity production it sustains the city by also providing flood control, irrigation support, and clean drinking water.

Here are some easy ways to reduce your carbon footprint:

1.Not buy disposable plastic water bottles for keeping water
2.Have the washer on the cool water cycle
3.Incorporate walking for short distances
4.Turn off AC or Heater when not home
5.Use alternative transportation and carpool 1 day a week
6.Drive efficiently, coast to red lights and use the gas pedal lightly

https://www.austintexas.gov/blog/top-10 … save-money

My family use bicycles for the most part for transport. To get to school and back, I walk an hour everyday. Transport in a sustainable city should be public, like electric trams and trains and most people should walk or ride bikes.

I agree but It is not that simple. Biking and walking take much longer than other modes of transportation and public transportation is not always the best option for people. Public transportation cannot take you anywhere there would need to be large amount of it to be able to provide easy access in every area, and that would be costly and less effective, since less people would be using each shuttle/bus. For some people cars are a better option, still it is important to reduce the amount of cars being used as much as possible

A big part of what makes a city unsustainable is transportation, energy, and waste. In order to fix the transportation problem, Cars release a lot of carbon in order to get energy so a sustainable city should have everything within a reasonable walking or biking distance so that cars are unnecessary and cars and electric transportation should also be discouraged. Also, to keep the energy source sustainable, because a lot of our energy comes from burning fossil fuels, the buildings should all have solar panels. On the topic of waste, we can have more centers for recycling and composting and make sure compost and recycling bins are always available.

What makes a city sustainable? Sustainable cities are designed to lessen the environmental impact on the earth by taking efforts to offer eco-friendly alternatives to your everyday life. One of the most effective ways to improve the sustainability of a city is to encourage and raise the use of public transportation (buses, trains, etc). This benefits the environment by reducing the number of private vehicles being used (and can reduce CO2 emissions by 45%). In the US, it is estimated that an annual amount of 37 million metric tons of CO2 is saved by the use of public transportation. To continue to see this decrease of environmental impact, we need to encourage the addition and use of these transportation options in cities.

https://transportation.ucla.edu/blog/5- … sportation

Aviation accounts for 3.5% of climate change, producing 2.8% of the global carbon footprint. With this in mind, when you travel consider alternatives to flying, such as taking a train or bus, or even driving.Even though driving may produce more CO2, it has an overall lower effect, and if you drive with others, that can further reduce your impact. Another thing to consider is electric planes, which many countries are working towards, but will they come fast enough?

https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-aviation

https://terrapass.com/blog/carbon-footprint-of-driving-vs-flying-whats-best-for-the-earth/#:~:text=So%2C%20if%20you're%20traveling,that%20the%20extra%20weight%20would

When was the last time you walked through the city, admiring the sights as you go to buy groceries?  When was the last time you walked anywhere without seeing a gas station on the corner? City infrastructure in this modern day was not made with pedestrians in mind. To the city planners, walking pedestrians are a roadblock, a problem to be fixed. What they are aiming for is a population that drives everywhere to pay for gas, pay the parking tickets, pay the fines for driving a red light. Cities like Amsterdam are the first city to adopt the donut economic model to limit climate impact, and they have been making countless innovations and improvements in many industries, such as low-waste dining, high-efficiency with low-carbon footprint construction, and was home to one of the first startup accelerators dedicated to sustainable fashion.  Amsterdam uses green energy whenever possible for hotels and venues, and continuously improves upon itself in all industries, consistently ranking high up in Schroders European Sustainable Cities Index, along with it’s population being highly dependent on bikes (not electric!), and low use of cars. If I were in charge of planning a city, I would take heavy inspiration from Amsterdam’s infrastructure and laws it has in place. I would put emphasis on making beautiful buildings, and move away from minimalist designs so people would go out more. I would dedicate large areas for recreational activities and gardens/other plants. I would heavily encourage local businesses, with less support given towards large retailers, and provide many trash/recycling bins all over the city for easy disposal.

I like your take on Amsterdam's well made infrastructure- you went into detail about every aspect that was improved, hopefully many US cities will also take inspiration from Amsterdam as well. Although there are some good examples of many US cities with infrastructure aimed to be pedestrian friendly, like Washington DC,Boston MA, and San Francisco.

A sustainable city is characterized by a holistic approach to urban development, with a focus on environmental, social, and economic well-being. According to the United Nations Global Carbon Footprint Index, cities are responsible for over 70% of global carbon dioxide emissions, making urban sustainability imperative for mitigating climate change. Sustainable cities prioritize efficient public transportation systems, renewable energy sources, green infrastructure, and waste reduction programs. For example, Copenhagen, Denmark, serves as an inspiring model, with its emphasis on cycling infrastructure, renewable energy projects, and stringent environmental regulations, leading to a significant reduction in carbon emissions. Sustainable cities like Copenhagen aim to provide a high quality of life for their residents while reducing their ecological footprint, emphasizing that urban areas can lead the way in creating a more environmentally friendly and resilient future.

I think that a way to decrease the emission of CO2 in big cities is to increase public transportation, expecially the electric ones like trams, trains or trolleybusses.

juen i think we can also use bikes, bikes are cheap and really helpfull, everybody can afford a bike and so everyone don't have to pay for tickets for tram, train, ecc

I think another way of facing this problem would be walkable cities. This solution is the idea of people walking or biking rather than driving. This solution is free to anyone and could actually save you money. We would need to make biggger and more side walks for these people. This would combat climate change a ton.

Various cities indeed have aimed to limit and reduce their carbon emissions by ~40% by the year 2050. Without a doubt, we understand that densely populated areas rely heavily on transportation, as commuting is quite frequent when all you see from every corner of your eye are buildings and skyscrapers. With this being said, we need to capture carbon from the air with means of planting enough trees to in the slightest way absorb the carbon emitted into the atmosphere.

We can see many streets in cities, but in contrast to the number of walkable streets, it is unbalanced in ratio. As Charlie915 stated above, we need to expand sidewalks to combat climate change and reduce these cities' carbon emissions.

Incorporating also, more reusable products and things being sold in the cities, will and can help in ways to reduce waste while encouraging recycling.

I agree with this claim, as we have mentioned before, many pollution and other gases have been emitted in the air causing pollution which would soon take over the wildlife. Without this wildlife we would be stripped of a major amount of food. As Joy has mentioned above, we need to look at the amount of carbon emitted into the air, and we should regulate the amount of transportation to a low digit. If we continue to take transportation through cars that need gas or any vehicle, then for sure our carbon footprint will rise and reach tremendous heights. We need to be more self-aware and responsible towards our Earth. We only have one of it.

I agree, increasing public transportation would decrease the emissions of CO2. And like inot flam and Charlie915 said earlier, increasing the number of people who bike or walk instead of driving or riding public transportation could help decrease the emissions of CO2. Making cities safer to walk would be a major help as well, according to the World Health Organization, 270,000 pedestrians are killed every year.

I agree, everyone having their own cars causes so much unnecessary pollution. If public transport took everyone where they needed to go to so much time, energy, and money would be saved by everyone involved. It would also go towards saving the planet.

I completely agree. Especially electric transportation to reduce greenhouse gas emmisions from cars and other vehicles.

In Oslo, infrastructure for cyclists is prioritized to the point that bike routes will often be plowed and salted before car roads. By making it easier for individuals to cycle, more people will naturally be drawn to it. Obviously this model wouldn't necessarily work everywhere in the world (especially in areas with less population density) but it's something to consider. NotJustBikes on Youtube has a good video on this topic. Unfortunately, the automotive industry is HUGE and it is their best interest to build and maintain car dependency.

I agree if cities made public transportations by electric powered vehicles mandatory the carbon emissions would drastically be lowered.

I agree because not only will this reduce carbon emissions but it will also help society globally depending on the design of the public transportation trains for fuel efficiency.

While nowadays many big cities have started to cut back on direct air pollution, not all though, people often forget about dealing with the residual or possibly still growing amounts left over. A National History Museum study found that nine million people die every year as a result of city air pollution. This is why designated green spaces in cities are so vital. As well as improving people's moods, and providing a place for activities like walking, sports, community events, and space for pets to be outisde, green spaces can also help reduce the air pollution and then save people.
Here is a link to the Museum study: https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/why-we-n … ities.html

we should really reduce the use of battery because it would pollute the soil and basicly make it unusable.

Instead of reducing the amount of batteries. I suggest all battery brands to switch over to reusable batteries . All my batteries at home are reuse-able. Sure they may cost more than regular ones but, they last for years. How it works is once the battery is dead, you charge them and they are back to normal. I feel like reusable batteries are the way to go. Another question is, what if they die out and where do we dispose them. Not saying that brands will do this but, they could open shops were people can dispose the batteries for money and that will create a whole cycle of using the battery then it dies out then you dispose them at the shop for money.

I like your idea of the battery disposal station. I also think there should be adjustments made that consider the byproduct of certain products and wether or not these creations need to even hit the market. People, firms and laws should take into consideration sustainability when trying to bring a new product to market.

I agree we should stop using non reusable batteries. My family has also used rechargeable batteries and they are also more financially smart to buy

I agree that using batteries is not sustainable for the environment but the cost of just a 4 pack of rechargeable batteries can be expensive for most. I do use them but I end up losing them and or use normal ones again. Is there any other viable option for people who wouldn't necessarily use rechargeable batteries?

I feel if more and more people start using the rechargeable batteries there would be less waste. Even if they are more expensive than the one use ones, you are still just buying them once until you really need to buy them again.

Copenhagen, Denmark is currently the number one sustainable city in the world. They use advanced technology to monitor the buildings energy and water flow. They have vending machines around town that receive plastic bottles for funds that one can either keep or donate to charity to encourage recycling. They use shared resources by participating in district heating and cooling. The power plant used to power the heating and cooling uses biomass to fuel it, while above the surface citizens can ski during the winter or enjoy the paths that sit atop. Pocket parks and rooftop gardens help control urban heat island effect, which cause the cities temperatures to rise. They have a superhighway for cyclists that have traffic lights that are synced to their pace. there are 546 km of bike paths that connect multiple cities. What the city has done was made it convenient for the people. Twenty-four percent of people eat organically because it is more affordable and available.
They continue to discover new ways to live sustainably. The hotels practice sustainable habits by using the dryers only when it rains outside, compost all food in the kitchen, and refuse to give out any single use plastics. Check out their practices here:
https://www.wonderfulcopenhagen.com/won … copenhagen

Having done a presentation on the topic I figured I'd put that knowledge to good use. Whenever we discuss lowering our carbon footprint we probably think about our impact as an individual but focusing on a group, or in this case a location, would work the best. We can all learn to live more sustainably with our environments if we take a look at the cities around us.

Zurich, a city in Switzerland, is a solid pick and the gold standard for sustainable living. Zurich is a city which focuses on pre-planning, meaning it tailors the city based on their resident population(s). Most people are either in walking distance of where they need to be or are able to catch a form of public transport that lowers the individual // group emissions caused by greenhouse gases. I've attached a link for further reading on Zurich for those interested!

( https://www.zuerich.com/en/about-zt/sustainability )

Any future Sustainable City should have:
-renewable, clean energy sources (solar panels on buildings, for example)
-roads and areas dedicated to biking, jogging, and walking
-sustainable organic farms for locally-grown food
-lots of open space and areas with vegetation for the local population
-wilderness areas for local wildlife
-electric public transportation

For any sustainable city you will need to
-encourage other ways of transportation instead of cars
-renewable energy
-sustainable farms
-places near each other so easier to get around

As humans, we can protect our planet by doing little things every day that in the long run, will be benefitial to the prevention of climate change. One way of doing this is carpooling if you and others are going to the same destination like work. Carpooling leads to fewer cars on the road, and lower parking demand, which leads to less greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, half of the carbon emmisions in America come from petroleum vehicles. That's one of the main reasons for the recent spike in electric vehicle sales. But carpooling isn't the only thing we can do. We can bike to our destination, and if that isn't possible, most cities have a reliable public transportation system as well. There are many things that big corporations and the government can do to temporarily "solve" climate change, but it is up to us a society to do our part so we can keep are planet as long as possible.

https://www.c2es.org/content/reducing-y … footprint/
https://tsrc.berkeley.edu/publications/ … carpooling

I agree, daily actions can make a difference

Transportation is one of our largest emissions, this is a good solution plan to this large issue

Any future Sustainable City should have:
-renewable, clean energy sources (solar panels on buildings, for example)
-roads and areas dedicated to biking, jogging, and walking
-sustainable organic farms for locally-grown food
-lots of open space and areas with vegetation for the local population
-wilderness areas for local wildlife
-electric public transportation

In order to build a more sustainable world we can Shift towards renewable energy sources, such as solar, wind, and hydroelectric power. Adopt more sustainable agricultural practices, such as agroforestry and organic farming. Prioritize conservation and protection of biodiversity. Shift towards a circular economy.

This is a really good explanation and ideas, also adding more protected forests can help!

Families all around the world produce carbon in the environment. However, how exactly does this affect the city and how should be world to make it sustainable? In cities, a huge amount of factories also cause emissions and the purchase of goods is huge in the development of carbon. Holiday shopping was one of the most detrimental factors in the carbon in the environment. Holiday shopping brings the development of new goods. Shopping in person can also cause more carbon to be in the environment, making online shopping appealing and helpful for the limitations of carbon in the atmosphere. However, shipping things brings lots of carbon into the atmosphere. As many may know, transportation is huge for the development of carbon in the atmosphere. The constant delivery of goods to homes brought carbon into the atmosphere. Unfortunately, limiting the amount of carbon in the atmosphere is difficult due to the needs and movement of many throughout families daily lives.

When you say "Carbon from Families," I think you mean carbon emissions produced by individual houses or families. Household carbon emissions contribute to the overall carbon footprint and can have a number of environmental consequences: Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a greenhouse gas that traps heat in the Earth's atmosphere and contributes to climate change. The use of fossil fuels for heating, cooking, transportation, and power generation emits CO2 into the atmosphere. CO2 and other greenhouse gases emitted by humans contribute to global warming and climate change, resulting in a variety of environmental repercussions such as increased temperatures, changing weather patterns, and sea-level rise. Air Pollution: Many home activities entail the use of fossil fuels, such as driving with gasoline or heating with coal, oil, or natural gas.

Sustainable cities is a very contradictory term considering they consume 80% of global energy and are responsible for 70% of greenhouse gas emissions. But this is all the more reason we need to switch to making our cities more sustainable. It is also predicted that by 2050 as much as 70% of the global population will live in cities. This large amount of people will generate huge amounts of waste and pollution and threaten the biodiversity of our cities. This is why we need to make the shift toward compact, low-carbon, resilient cities. There are some organizations already doing this, for example the program UrbanShift. This program supports 23 cities in 9 countries and is working on implementing a low-carbon infrastructure, sustainable waste management and nature-based solutions for urban sustainability. We need more people to take action like this because as the population grows there will be more people living in Cities and we will need to accommodate them while still taking a sustainable approach. To do this we need to create more sustainable transportation and lower our use of fossil fuels in general. We also need to create sustainable living spaces in order to lower our greenhouse gas emissions. This will be a hard process but I believe if we stay committed we will be able to succeed in making cities sustainable.

Works Cited
Global Environment Facility. Sustainable Cities. Global Environment Facility, https://www.thegef.org/what-we-do/topic … ble-cities.
The Global Goals. Sustainable Cities and Communities. The Global Goals, https://www.globalgoals.org/goals/11-su … mmunities/.
UN environment programme. Sustainable Cities. https://www.unep.org/regions/asia-and-p … ble-cities.

Our cities are rapidly growing with inhabitants and the space they occupy. About every minute, we add 10,000 meters of this city space. This development requires us to think about how we should change the way our cities are engineered. Cities are a main contributor to climate change. Today, cities take 3% of the earth's land, but take two-thirds of the world's energy demand and account for over 70% of global CO2 emissions. Most of this comes from industrial and motorized transportation that uses huge quantities of fossil fuels and infrastructure constructed with carbon materials. Almost half of the world's population lives in cities, which will likely increase by two-thirds by 2030. So how can we contribute to creating a sustainable city?
We can first start by lowering transportation emissions. Transportation emissions account for roughly 28% of greenhouse gas emissions. These forms of transportation primarily come from our cars, trucks, ships, planes, and more. Some strategies for transportation can be fuel economy and fuel efficiency. Fuel economy is how far a car can go using a set amount of fuel and is measured in miles per gallon (MPG). Fuel efficiency refers to how efficiently a vehicle uses fuel and can be improved through driver technique and maintenance. We can save fuel by using carpooling, riding transit, biking, or walking to a place. These are some ways that we can reduce emissions from transportation. Next is electricity production, which takes up 25% of gas emissions. Electric power generates the second largest share of greenhouse gas emissions. 79% of our electricity comes from burning fossil fuels, coal, and natural gas. As individuals, we can do simple things such as turning off any electric devices completely such as, computers, televisions, video games, and other electronics when not using them. If you have an air conditioner, you can limit the use of it. These are some ways that we can help control our carbon footprints and help to overall maintain a sustainable city.

Works Cited:
epa.gov.
-Fossil Fuels-https://www.epa.gov/nutrientpollution/sources-and-solutions-fossil-fuels
-https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions#transportation

des.nh.gov-
-https://www.des.nh.gov/climate-and-sustainability/transportation/emission-reduction-strategies#:~:text=Conserve%20fuel%20and%20protect%20the,to%20reduce%20emissions%20from%20transportation.

blogs.worldbank.org-
-https://blogs.worldbank.org/sustainablecities/cutting-global-carbon-emissions-where-do-cities-stand#:~:text=Cities%20account%20for%20over%2070,constructed%20with%20carbon%2Dintensive%20materials.

sustainable transportation refers to low- and zero-emission, energy-efficient, and cost-effective forms of transportation, such as electric and alternative-fuel cars and domestic fuels. I think sustainable transportation is important since there are over 8 billion people on the planet, and most of them are going in the same direction. Why not save the earth while you head to work? Taking a bus could reduce the carbon footprint. there is room for 40-80 people on one bus and buses use about 137.2 miles in a day compared to a car's 137.4. Using a bus is a very obvious answer to the carbon footprint, but if you travel far and wide I might suggest an electric car that can be charged instead of using gases created in horrible conditions. All in all you should use buses and electric cars instead of gas cars.
https://www.codot.gov/programs/innovati … ransit.pdf

https://afdc.energy.gov/conserve/public … ation.html

Climate change has been one of the biggest issues that humans have ever faced on earth. Numerous studies have shown that humans are the main causes of the recent spikes of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses in our atmosphere which carry on to affect not only humans but the entire earth as well. As of 2022 cities have accounted for 70% of carbon emissions. Things like electricity, heat, and transportation all are the main producers of greenhouse gas emissions. The solution to the recent spike in climate is not to eliminate these necessities but to change the power source. If humans can switch to a more environmentally ethical power source, such as solar power, which is powered by the sun, humans can enjoy sustainable cities as well as restore the earth's environment.   
https://blogs.worldbank.org/sustainable … 0materials.

Cities are responsible for around %70 of emissions. How do we decrease this number? One thing that cities can do is to improve their infrastructure. We need to create sustainable cities. These cities must be eco friendly and environmentally caring. Some ways to make a city more sustainable is making larger sidewalks and more bike lanes so people can move around their city in other ways than just driving. Also cities must improve their public transportation. In some cities public transportation is very good and some people don’t need a car. In other cities the public transportation system is not run well and is not able to transport as many people to more places. Another way to make a city more sustainable is water conservation. There is very very little fresh water on this planet, and when cities dump all of the rain water back into the ocean it’s waising millions of gallons of drinking water for its residents. These are some ways to make a city more sustainable.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/09/ … structure/
https://www.thezebra.com/resources/home … able-city/

Sustainable cities are not only achievable but within reach with nudges in the right direction. Many of the technologies for a green city have been developed already such as efficient means of transportation, green building and building materials, and green power supplies. One way in which buildings are already going greener is with green roofs these offer a nice outdoor space for the residents but also improve their environmental impact. While roof gardens are cool they don't affect that much adding greenery to an entire building significantly helps its carbon impact. A less structural change to make cities greener and nicer is planting more trees and adding trees along with painting the roads another color. Both of these would significantly decrease the heat bubble effect in cities making them more livable and environmentally friendly.
https://www.thezebra.com/resources/home … able-city/
https://www.thegef.org/what-we-do/topic … ble-cities

If i were a mayor for a city the first thing I would do is to stop making gas cars and encourage people to use electric cars. This would bring down co2 emissions and would help out the cities footprint. Another thing I would do is make public transfer cheaper so, people will use it more. Also, there will be public accessible bikes that will be free. I would build more vegan and vegetarian restaurants to encourage people to try a plant base diet.

Everyone is talking about the bad influence of gas cars on our environment but nobody does much about it. People who have great political power could do much about it, for example, try to lower the prices of electric cars and give people cash incentives because many people can't afford them. There are also many problems with the public transfer, but also many solutions. I think that we should make some changes in the public transfer so more people would use it. I don't have the best experience with it in my city so I don't find it strange that some people don't want to use it. It would also be good if cities were better suited for cyclists and other sustainable vehicles. It would be difficult to get many people to try a plant-based diet, so better, more sustainable ways of raising food animals would need to be developed.

In addition to producing electric cars, they should make electric public transportation. I take the bus to and from school 5 days a week, and although it is better than individual driving, it still emits a lot of greenhouse gasses. Because electric vehicles do not rely on fossil fuels for power they do not emit carbon dioxide which helps reduce air pollution. Electricity has many ways of being naturally produced such as solar panels and windmills. As opposed to gases made from pulling fossil fuels from the ground.
https://www.samsara.com/guides/how-are- … vironment/

When I calculated my carbon footprint and looked through the different carbon footprints of schools I could see that just one person’s carbon footprint can’t make a big enough difference on climate change. I think that to make a big difference cities as a whole have to change. Cities only take up 3% of land on Earth, but amount to 60-80% of energy consumption and at least 70% of carbon emissions and in 2018, 55% of the world population lived in cities. This number is expected to rise to two-thirds of the world population by 2050. https://psci.princeton.edu/tips/2020/6/ … ble-cities This means that an effective way to reduce the world wide carbon footprint is to change cities as a whole, not just one person. As cities inevitably grow they should use more sustainable practices. A few things cities can and should do is invest in public transport, create green public spaces, and make urban planning and management more participatory and inclusive.
https://www.iea.org/reports/empowering- … ero-future For a more carbon sustainable future cities need to change and grow to be more sustainable as a whole. People should push their city to become more sustainable to make a bigger impact on saving the planet.

based on the information from https://psci.princeton.edu/tips/2020/6/ … ble-cities and https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles … re-greener Larger cities with more money tend to be more sustainable based on population size. Big cities like Adelaide Copenhagen and San Fransico have in place a plan over the following years to become mainly if not completely sustainable. Larger cities also have the advantages of things being closer in proximity to the things needed on a daily basis. They also have advantages like public transport like buses, trains, and carpools. In most of these cities, the average family has a lower carbon emission, because they are newer and have more efficient ways to use energy, resulting in less carbon dioxide emissions.

Your argument that cities and areas with more money tend to be more sustainable is valid to some extent. Wealthier cities and regions tend to have better access to resources and infrastructure, which can contribute to a higher level of sustainability. However, many low-income communities have shown a commitment to sustainable practices, such as community gardening and recycling programs, despite their limited resources. Some people make these gardens to better the area they are in, like these people from Boston (https://nextcity.org/urbanist-news/Lati … ens-Boston)
Furthermore, wealth can also contribute to unsustainable practices. For example, people with higher incomes tend to travel more, which is one of the main sources of climate change because of coal, oil, and gas. [(https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-aviation) Additionally, rich communities may prioritize economic growth over environmental protection, leading to a disregard for sustainability concerns. While there are areas like San Francisco that influence sustainability in their city, it doesn’t mean all richer areas are going to be more sustainable.

Economically prosperous cities/areas are capable of maintaining sustainability, however, that doesn't necessarily mean they will. In an article published by The Environmental Science Journal for Teens (https://www.sciencejournalforkids.org/w … rticle.pdf), they state that people with higher incomes are able to engage in excess consumerism. These indulges include flying planes more often, driving more, and purchasing more. In comparison to the average working class, higher income people emit more greenhouse gases. My point being that, having more money doesn't equate to sustainability. Also it should be noted that, since we live in a capitalist society, cities and corporations benefit from more item productions and purchases. This greatly contributes to greenhouse gas production. The University of Manchester (https://sites.manchester.ac.uk/global-s … te-change/) adds that capitalistic reform is necessary in reducing our damage to the Earth. This brings up the issue of civilization prioritizing monetary value over our planet's well-being. So in short, is it possible? Yes, but we, as a community, must disregard the materialistic, and dangerous, practices we've put into place.

in my town we can't reduce so much the consuption of fossil fuel,because we don't live in a big city where there are busses every 5 mins so we need to use our car to do or go everywhere,if the busses arrive every 10-15 mins i guess it will reduce so much. what can we do? can modern tecnology help and how?

Hello Kevv, I think something that you and your community could do is ride bikes or any vehicle that does not use fossil fuels to get around so it does not produce fossil fuels that affects our earth in a negative way. Riding a bike also can reduce traffic. Stacking  cars in traffic are bad for the environment, so less cars on the road means a healthier earth. Someone riding a bike can go 960 miles on the amount of energy that goes into moving a car 20 miles. This will help reduce your problem in your community.

https://www.umt.edu/transportation/bike … 20%20miles.

Today, there are approximately 700 million people living in cities. While cities are increasing economic growth globally, they consume 80% of global energy and are responsible for 70% of greenhouse gas emissions. Economic growth has caused millions of people to be lifted from poverty as well as caused an increase in rural-to-urban migration. This growth is generating vast amounts of waste and pollution and threatening cities' biodiversity. Cities leave a large carbon footprint that is threatening natural resources required to sustain economic growth and poverty alleviation rates. Currently, cities are struggling with environmental degradation, traffic congestion, urban infrastructure, and water and waste management. If cities don’t figure out a way to handle these problems, then the earth can become more polluted than it already is and lots of life and biodiversity will be lost. By 2050, it is estimated that 70% of the global population will be living in cities. Currently, cities are working to create sustainable consumption and production roadmaps for cities, along with upstream interventions to reduce and manage pollution and waste. But to create a major change in our ecosystem, cities must create sustainable transportation and buildings to lower the amount of greenhouse gases they are responsible for. As well as lower their carbon infrastructure and find nature-based solutions for sustainability. Many don’t realize how the planet they live on is slowly dying because of human activities, but there is still time to try and make a difference.

Sources: https://www.unep.org/regions/asia-and-p … ble-cities, https://www.thegef.org/what-we-do/topic … ble-cities

If composting scalable for cities and towns? At what point does transportation outweigh benefits of centralizing waste systems?

Composting might be scalable for cities or towns, but there are a lot of factors that depend on that. The city or town has to have enough space for composting, and there has to be a way to handle and use all of that compost after it is done composting. The compost could be used to fertilize a city farm or a local farm, they could transport the compost with trucks to the farms. So to answer you're question, yes i think it would be possible to compost  on a city level.

Have larger amounts of plants

In cities there is a severe lack of plants and areas such as parks so I think that it would be beyond valuable if more plants were to either be implemented on the buildings exterior or if they were to create more spots where plant life can thrive.

I agree, people are so focused on building new structures instead of repurposing run-down or abandoned sites. If we stopped destroying our plant life and hold off on creating new places our earth would be so much greener.

I completely agree. The community is so focused on making new buildings, putting in housing, constructing more roads/highways, etc, that they don’t include parks in that list. I believe that constructing community parks is crucial because it allows the community a chance to help out by planting things in gardens, enjoy the fresh air, and provide a gathering space for clubs, companies, etc., even in a gazebo. People disregard the outdoors because they are preoccupied with the interior world.

I agree as well. Adding more parks, trees, and plants to cities could have many benefits, many of which are already listed. By having more nature mixed in with cities, it would make the cities be much more friendly to the environment, as well as animals. It could definitely improve air quality, and it would overall make the city more balanced, eco friendly, and much more beautiful and inviting in general.

I completely agree with you! Having more plants in cities and towns can have a positive impact on the environment, such as reducing air pollution and providing habitat for wildlife. You are completely right about people shining more light on infrastructure rather than the plants and earth quality, but I think that even if people started taking action on planting more trees and other things of the sort, people may not stop littering. It’s important for individuals to take responsibility for their actions and dispose of waste properly to maintain a clean and healthy environment, before trying to make it better. Despite this challenge, I do believe that the benefits of having more plants in our communities outweigh the potential drawbacks.

Cannot store energy, costly to make, no energy at night, costs a lot of resources and makes a lot of pollution when creating solar panels, takes up lots of space.

ARE THEY EVEN WORTH IT WHY DO SO MANY PEOPLE LOVE THEM SO MUCH???

i do not get it. pls comment to tell me..

The environment is significantly assisted by solar panels. To create electricity you need to burn coal. There are many people who require electricity, not just one, and coal is a non-renewable resource on Earth. We need coal for many purposes, yet burning all that coal might make it vanish. A fantastic method to keep the coal would be to install solar panels. Solar panels cut back on harmful pollutants including sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and pollutants as well as greenhouse gas emissions such as CO2. Despite the fact that they cost a lot to produce, unlike electricity, they are inexpensive to maintain.

Although it might be worth it for homeowners, but in places with tall apartment buildings like Taiwan, how are we supposed to install solar panels that can power the entire building?

Another question: are solar farms worth it? I've read that solar panels breaks after 10 ~ 15 years. It would be hard to maintain these farms.

They are actually already doing the solar panels on buildings thing in Alaska. They put it in the side of the building. Other places but it them all on the top of the building. It might be hard for it to get the power for the whole building but they get 250 to 400 watts per hour so it would last.

Yes solar farms are also worth it. They can be used to plant crops and other plants. I believe It’s called agrovoltaics.

Here is an example of the solar panel buildings that they are making.

I would call solar panels worth it. I think this because they produce lots of energy after they are built, and don't dump a lot of energy away, unlike coal plants that make energy but also warm up lots of air exiting the power plant.

I believe that solar panels are definitely worth it. It may be hard to put solar panels on top of buildings, but there are other places that solar panels could be built. In my states capital, there are solar panels on sides of highways. They are able to power most of the city!

Are cities currently more or less sustainable than rural areas? There are many factors that need to be considered in this question, and there may not be one deffinitive answer, however in thinking about how cities should look in the future, we need to figure out what exactly we need to change now. The basic idea and deffinition of a city is that many people would be living close together and in smaller areas. Condensing the areas that are inhabited by people leaves more space for wild life and the enviornment to flourish, this alone would reduce the impact humans have on the enviornment. However, cities are also  huge carbon emitters, and resorce dumps. Factories belch out smoke, trafic flows day and night, and neon signs blaze, blocking out the night sky. Where is the balence point? At what point does the benifits of leaving space for nature to flurish out weigh the pollution caused by cities. Is it possible to create a perfectly sustainable city, in wich the positives vastly outweigh the disastorous consequenses on the enviornment? The question we must ask is; “ how do we achieve this ideal city?”.

I believe that the United States should should either federally, or at the state level in act regulations which require the use of materials which decrease the need for energy consumption. These materials could range from triple pained glass, to the use of spray foam, and passive heating and cooling systems. Creating energy efficient homes is not a futuristic idea, highlighted through Colby Collages 10 years of carbon neutrality.

It's important that we less the use of fossil fuel for production of energy and we most use the green energy

I agree i think if a majority of humans can come together and take action this could definitely be an excellent way to to reduce the consumption of fossil fuel.

I think that if some major companies such as paper mills went away the global emissions for fossil fuels would go down by a lot.

I think local governments should enact different policies to reduce carbon emissions. For example, various state governments had planned to ban gasoline car sales by 2030. City governments should consider making public transportation more feasible, and should discourage acts which will harm to the environment.

Hello! I'm agree with you
if this kind of action is repeated everywhere the carbon footprint will be better on more reduced it will always be better

I also agree with you. I live off the coast of Maine and stores around here have also started banning plastic bags in grocery stores to help our environment. They replaced them with large brown paper bags. Little things like this can help decrease our carbon emissions but it’s going to take a lot more than that to really make a change/difference.

If i were a mayor for a city the first thing I would do is to stop making gas cars and encourage people to use electric cars

in large cities, the transport system can be modified, completely eliminating private vehicles and instead introducing a more effective and more networked public transport system

hi, I'm silvia, I agree with what Ahmed says, I also think the transport system could be changed, certainly not by totally eliminating private cars, because for example where I live it would not be possible to always move with public transport, but you should try to use your own cars as little as possible, using public transport when possible, or use the same car to go to the same places, such as to go to school, work or simply to go out to the same place.

Hello! I that private transport can be eliminated, but unfortunately where I live, in the mountains, it is not possible to reduce public transport (also because there are very few of them) there fore we are "forced" to use private buses. So there are no solutions? absolutely not, in Valle Camonica (Northern Italy) where I live, they are modifying the trains and using hydrogen, so that the few public they will be less polluting.

First of all, in my sustainable city I would make available the rental of cars, bicycles and motorcycles to reduce the circulation of vehicles on the roads and to reduce the pollution. I would also expand the public transport service with greener buses and trams.

In my sustainable city, first of all, I would expand public transport service, such as with buses that are greener and less polluting than trams. I would also make available to all citizens the main vehicles such as cars through carpooling, bicycles and scooters with bike sharing to circulate fewer vehicles in the city.

For a sustainable city, I think that cities should also be run by solar panels which convert sun energy into electric energy, and windmills. Those two are much better options instead of burning fossil fuels. There are also small things people can do at home like creating an at home garden, and like you said, public transport is also a big one.

I think to make a sustainable city, you have to make sure that everyone's needs are meet in one area so that the need for cars/transportation is low and when transportation is needed it is public transportation trains and buses or is walking and biking. I also think that having plenty of green spaces are super important because it will benefit peoples mental health and the city's carbon footprint.

To make a sustainable city, we need to reduce our carbon footprint and have a stable food source. One of the best solutions to this is to stop wasting food because it not only helps stabilize the food source but will actually reduce methane gases put into the atmosphere. Methane is produced when food is decomposing. Lets make our world a sustainable city and stop wasting food!

We should live in a world where we do not use plastic bags. We should also reuse, THEN recycle. Save water, save electricity. Live sustainable.

In Canada most restaurants and shops don't use plastic bags anymore. They mainly use paper or fabric bags now.
But I'm pretty sure in the U.S they still use plastic bags so I think they could invest in paper, fabric or whatever that is not harmful to the environment. If the world had no plastic bags then sea animals would benefit a lot from that because they die from plastic bags often. But anywhere in the world where they still give out plastic bags, they should definitely take action and eliminate plastic bags.

To make a sustainable city we need to come together and ensure that people have asceses to a sustainable income, a safe place to go home to after school/work, a good transit system, places where you can get mental health support, parks and gardens, and alternative things to fossil fuel (such as solar panels, eclectic cars, windmills etc.). To me all of these things are what a sustainable city would look like, and I hope we can all work towards accomplishing that goal.

I think a way to make a sustainable city is to make a way to stop a lot of cars from driving all the time to and from anywhere they want to go. Instead what we should do is make almost like many different train stations around the city that goes to a checkpoint or place that is close to many popular places. They could also make a way for students to be able to come home safely also with some sort of transit that doesn't take a lot of Co2. We can also find other alternatives to making electricity. Some of the ways we can make electricity is by solar panels, windmills or other items that don't take fossil fuels.

I think a way to make a sustainable city is to make a way to stop a lot of cars from driving all the time to and from anywhere they want to go. Instead what we should do is make almost like many different train stations around the city that goes to a checkpoint or place that is close to many popular places. They could also make a way for students to be able to come home safely also with some sort of transit that doesn't take a lot of Co2. We can also find other alternatives to making electricity. Some of the ways we can make electricity is by solar panels, windmills or other items that don't take fossil fuels.

i feel like to really get our carbon emmissions down, cities should invest in public transit, whether that means subways, or buses because a bunch of people having their own little cars will have an exponentially bigger carbon footprint than a bunch of people on a bus or a train. it would also be great if there were long distance rails between cities, especially here in canada, as it would cut down on gas being used by people going on road trips. not to mention that we could get rid of big busy roads and have parks and places for pedestrians to walk, making a safer city for everyone.

not to mention the fact that subways usually run on electricity (cutting down on fossil fuels) but also that public transit makes it easy for everyone to get around, and its way cheaper than owning a car. so not only would we be able to have sustainable methods of getting around, but also methods of transportation that would be open to everyone, regardless of wealth.

Should some cities like new york or tokyo begin using solar panels on skyscrapers to get energy in a cleaner way?

100%! i feel all city's should become run by solar panels. But this is a task that will not be easy and will take billions upon billions dollars to do. But there is hope there is to ways i see we could make this happen one by putting in place a solar energy tax. Or one that is more achieveble with something Elon Musk created called solar city. with this all it would take is a couple big companies to make the solar city's and then we can run our entire planet on solar energy.

if i where to make a city some thing i would do to make it green. first i would make it so everyone could use public transport to have less cars. second i would ban gas lawn mowers and only have push mowers, so cutting gras would no longer produce co2. lastly i would put a green space in any empty spot. wether it was an unused ally way or a empty patch of land.

I agree but I would also focus on converting to a mainly solar powered city with wind power backups as they are both very efficient for power use. Though for the grass I would transition out of  grass lawns as they perpetuate a monoculture of plants. Instead I would try to encourage native plants to grow in its place and specifically plant matter that could cater to native pollinators. I completely agree with you for greenspaces but instead of putting them in empty spots as a second thought they could take main stage of the city, combining the city's architecture with plants would provide a better air quality.

if i where to make a city some thing i would do to make it green. first i would make it so everyone could use public transport to have less cars. second i would ban gas lawn mowers and only have push mowers, so cutting gras would no longer produce co2. lastly i would put a green space in any empty spot. wether it was an unused ally way or a empty patch of land.

What can we do to create sustainable city? I think we can increase public transport, we can dissiminate initiatives like carpooling: sharing of car trips or bike sharing: sharing bicycles can make the difference. The challenge is to create a sistem of sustainable transportation for example in my region we will change old trains with Idrogen ones.

The city would be filled with public-accessible bikes. Transportation contributes significantly to pollution, so it is best to try to solve this issue. Electric cars would be less expensive than other types of vehicles. The greenhouse gas emissions associated with an electric vehicle are typically lower than those associated with a typical gasoline-powered vehicle over its lifetime. The presence of many trees and plants in the city would provide a fresh and lively atmosphere. This would increase the amount of oxygen and decrease the amount of storm water runoff, reducing erosion and pollution in the waterways and possibly reducing the effects of flooding.

I'm really happy to see how my small village is changing. We have placed dispositives for electric charging, since many people are changing their cars, is something new in the small reality where I live. Many houses have put solar panels on their roofs and more people now prefer clean energy.

According to the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency)
- As of 2020,
* Electricity makes up for 25% of greenhouse gases
* Transportation is 27%
By cutting down on these, we would be dealing with approximately 50% of the greenhouse gas emissions.

For electricity, we burn energy through things such as heating, ventilation, appliances, air conditioning and lighting. By switching away from fossil fuels and moving to cleaner energies, we would significantly cut down on fossil fuel emissions.

For transportation, a way that we could cut down on emitting fossil fuels is through electric cars and other public transportation vehicles. Using gas through regular means is through burning coal. Coal emits lots of CO2 (54% out of all of the total CO2 emissions to be exact). Another idea is to encourage the use of electric cars and creating more charging ports scattered throughout the city.
Using energies such as solar, hydroelectric, nuclear, and wind are all non emitting, so all of those would be an option for cutting down on emissions.

Author n/a, Updated April 14th, 2022, "Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions" Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/source … equivalent.

I agree with you if we get rid of these two aspect of the greenhouse gas emissions in a country which like you said it would be about 50% less greenhouse gas half of our problem is solved right there. We can then later try and solve for the other 50 percent.

I really agree with your idea to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions by generating electricity not using fossil fuel.
And talking about the CO2 emissions in transportation, I also agree with the idea using electric cars. I also think that we can design some airplanes that use hydrogen as fuel instead of oil. Burning hydrogen will produce water vapor as waste and does not heat up the atmosphere.

A big factor that is contributing to the growing global carbon emissions is transportation, or more specifically transportation including vehicles. Vehicles, specifically cars, are the #1 transportation method in the United States, with over 76% of Americans reporting cars as their way of commuting from home to work on the daily.

This is a growing problem because majority of cars, like stated above, utilize fossil fuels and generate a lot of carbon emissions. One solution to decreasing the high rate of car usage is to make more walkable cities. In America, there seems to be a problem with prioritizing automobiles while city planning. The consequences of this is seeing little to no sidewalks, not having crossable streets, limited public transportation, etc. I believe that if we make a change with our city infrastructure, and prioritize pedestrians, more people will start walking or biking instead of using cars.

Walkable cities can help decrease car usage, but only in said cities. The United States land wise mainly consists of rural areas, where walking to work could take hours. Automobiles are normally prioritized in the US due to cars being the best current solution we have to transporting citizens, as opposed to European countries which have the ability to build large public transit due to a smaller size.

It is a good idea to turn off water while doing small things like brushing your teeth, or cleaning dishes, because this uses a lot more water than needed. Things that take a lot of water can be things like watering plants, or washing cars. Ways you can solve this are by making irrigation systems, or using a single bucket of water to clean a car.

there are indeed many ways we waste water while not even noticing it and doing little things can save a lot of water.
triniti tikoi

A modern country with the lowest possible usage of the carbon footprint would be one that gets it power all from the sunlight. For example every home would have solar panels that would capture the sunlight energy for later usage like light and other stuff. Another elimination would be the usage of gasoline and electricity this would be replace by boats and buses and cars that are run by solar energy. The main source of energy would be Sunlight this can be expensive but really effectful when trying to reduce Co2

Though solar Panels are good way to lower Co2 emissions they are still expensive and hard to maintain for many people. Solar panels can be quite expensive and things like electric cars are not cheap either. There is also the fact that solar panels only work at night so the individual must be in possession of some of battery which would also expensive which is to be expected. Ways to fix these issues would be to create tax reductions on fully Solar or no C02 emitting power sources and by trying to make non C02 appliances more cost friendly.

In most cities, or in many places in the United States, There are buses, subway systems, taxis, Lyfts/Ubers, and other forms of transportation services. You can also use your car, your bike, your skateboard, or walk.  But everytime you use a bus, car, or other form of motor-based transportation, you might be releasing harmful smog and gas pollution. In order to fix these harmful practices, there needs to be better options for transportation that help decrease this pollution. For example, the use of buses that use renewable energy. Using a rechargable battery for buses can decrease the amount of pollution caused by buses. In California, school buses that are electric are being implemented in some school districts. On a state or country level, there could be separate funding that supports or encourages the production of non-fuel based vehicles. On a personal level, you can opt for transportation that requires no type of gas or fuel. For example, using your bike or walking for going to close by places, is a small and simple way to decrease the amount of pollution your vehicle releases by relying on it less. If you are going long distance, you can opt for buses that use eco-fuel or are electric, also decreasing the amount of pollution your vehicle releases.

What eco-friendly methods could we use to get rid of the huge landfills around the world? Would this cost more money than non eco-friendly methods?

San Francisco’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets follow a schedule, [in aim to reduce their carbon footprint and fulfill their initiative of achieving long-term sustainability of Sf’s built and natural environment. City-wide and neighborhood-scale efforts revolving around classic and widely-acknowledged environmentally sustainable categories which address: “climate protection, energy, water, waste and materials, air quality, ecology, and resilience.”

...So far their reduction targets have been attainable based on their ongoing success with being able to reach specific targeted measures, and the schedule is shown accordingly below:
25% reduction from 1990 emissions by 2017, 40% of emissions by 2025, and 80% by 2050.

With the introduction of newer and more enhanced technologies for more efficient and smart usage, the city has shifted and indeed altered the way service is delivered, the quality of life is ensured, and the approach to the overall reduction of carbon emissions and footprint, the city has implemented to ensure more years are added to Earth’s existence in the solar system in combating climate change.

The city continues to dedicate its service to this initiative of a sustainable city by embedding a comprehensive sustainability lens across the vast of its initiatives, in support and advocacy of maximizing co-benefits and regulations. 40% of SF's overall CO2 emissions come from cars and trucks. With this being said, San Francisco has adopted an ambitious action plan to outline its goals and pursuits to lower its carbon footprint. Creating these policies and providing an outline is a great start in the right direction. Clearly now, people have the opportunity to resort to and support legislation in efforts to keep us in the right direction for the long run. This topic of 'sustainable city' is just an initiative that San Francisco and many other cities around the globe have dedicated themselves to further investing in the generations after them to direct them in the right (cleaner and healthier) direction.

What has your city, county, or even country, done to implement green initiatives in order to combat climate change?

My apologies for the confusion. Please respond to the post above instead of this one. Written by the same person but under two different accounts. Thank you!

SUSTAINABLE CITY - SF PLANNING
San Francisco’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets follow a schedule, [in aim to reduce their carbon footprint and fulfill their initiative of achieving long-term sustainability of Sf’s built and natural environment. City-wide and neighborhood-scale efforts revolving around classic and widely-acknowledged environmentally sustainable categories which address: “climate protection, energy, water, waste and materials, air quality, ecology, and resilience.”

...So far their reduction targets have been attainable based on their ongoing success with being able to reach specific targeted measures, and the schedule is shown accordingly below:
25% reduction from 1990 emissions by 2017, 40% of emissions by 2025, and 80% by 2050.

With the introduction of newer and more enhanced technologies for more efficient and smart usage, the city has shifted and indeed altered the way service is delivered, the quality of life is ensured, and the approach to the overall reduction of carbon emissions and footprint, the city has implemented to ensure more years are added to Earth’s existence in the solar system in combating climate change.

The city continues to dedicate its service to this initiative of a sustainable city by embedding a comprehensive sustainability lens across the vast of its initiatives, in support and advocacy of maximizing co-benefits and regulations. 40% of SF's overall CO2 emissions come from cars and trucks. With this being said, San Francisco has adopted an ambitious action plan to outline its goals and pursuits to lower its carbon footprint. Creating these policies and providing an outline is a great start in the right direction. Clearly now, people have the opportunity to resort to and support legislation in efforts to keep us in the right direction for the long run. This topic of 'sustainable city' is just an initiative that San Francisco and many other cities around the globe have dedicated themselves to further investing in the generations after them to direct them in the right (cleaner and healthier) direction.

What has your city, county, or even country, done to implement green initiatives in order to combat climate change?

Lawns and monoculture are super unsustainable and hurt both the land they sit on and the ecosystems they take space from. So much more food could be produced too, if we used lawn space better and used better crop rotations to maximize farm health and variety. Before the industrial revolution, over 50% of food was personally produced, but lawn culture hurts that opportunity.

I agree that Monoculture is very destructive because of what happened in countries in Central America and central Asia. In Central America during the early 20th century, the banana companies who got their bananas from here had a heavy influence on the government to the point of almost controlling them. They used that power to continue to grow bananas which hurt local farmers and the environment. While in Central Asia in the late 20th century, the soviets used the land there to grow huge amounts of cotton. They eventually rerouted water to these fertile lands which caused the drying up of the Aral sea.

The city could have solar panals on every roof, and anywhere else applicable.Electric bikes and buses would be everywhere, and reletively cheap to use. Only electric cars would be allowed, and the recycling programs would be very advanced. Factories would be required to have low emissions, and there would be many plants on all of the buildings. All schools would teach the importance of having a low impact on the environment, and many animals would be trained to live safely in the city.

Absolutely, and the entire road system needs to be overhauled to allow people to exist comfortably without cars, and food production needs to avoid monoculture, because it sucks.

-Ethan K

Car Dependant Infrastructure in the United States and Canada are awful for CO2 emissions, and are SUPER classist. It is often necessary to use a vehicle to get anywhere in North America, and because bicycling is extremely dangerous, and public transport infrastructure has been completely gutted basically everywhere, the only way to consistently and safely get anywhere is with a car, which is extremely expensive. There is also a classist social stigma behind public transport, where if you aren’t in a car, you must be one of the poors. Our road systems are awful, too. I don’t have any real protection biking to school, besides some painted lines, and it’s almost impossible to get anywhere outside of a vehicle (and urban California is relatively utopian), and going to stores to get food and other essentials is awful and unsafe outside a vehicle, so poor people just have to go through hell to get essentials. Everything about North American stroads (an awful mix of roads and streets, which accomplishes the purpose of neither) is built to hurt anyone outside of cars, and cars hurt the environment and people outside of cars, and car-dependance hurts social connection and community buiding (because you need to go through driving a car to interact with people, and it’s unlikely you live close enough to someone to not drive to them, because houses are so far apart because of suburbanization, and because nobody is able to intact outside because everywhere is ugly and unpleasant, because of cars and stroads), anyone outside a car, and the environment again, because parking lots take up space and it’ll take a ton of time and destructive work to fix that in the future!

In addition to helping the environment, urban agriculture can also improve community members' health and well-being. The establishment of community gardens may be able to lessen the effects of food deserts in low-income communities and give locals more access to nutrient-dense foods that are essential for maintaining a healthy lifestyle. Urban regions' difficulties can be partially alleviated through community gardens. By making more wholesome foods more accessible, fostering stronger community bonds, lowering environmental risks, cutting down on food miles, and developing a more sustainable system, they can be a useful addition to many communities. By encouraging sustainable agriculture, lowering the cost of transporting food, and minimizing water runoff, community gardens can aid in lessening adverse environmental effects. There can also be community cooking classes in which people can be taught how to use their produce to make delicious food!

Community gardens:

-Help improve air and soil quality
-Increase biodiversity of plants and animals
-Reduce carbon emissions caused by the transport of food
-Can replace impervious structures and improve water infiltration
-Can reduce neighborhood waste through composting

In the US, some are trying to implement efficient energy but I believe that we should increase the amounts of efficient energy and cut back on our use of inefficient energy. If we increase the amount of solar in cities it will make cities more sustainable. We should make it required for citizens to compost their waste. This small change could make a large impact on the environment.

I think a major contributor to climate change is the amount of traffic in cities, and how in a lot of places it feels like a car is required to be able to go anywhere. A factor contributing to that is how little cities do to make transportation methods like biking accessible and safe. There are a lot of roads where there is not a bike lane and there is barely any space provided for bikes. At best, a bike has to use the side of the road, which is very narrow and usually contains garbage bins, parked cars, and other obstructions, and at worst there is no room for a bike on the road, and bikers have to use the unpaved terrain just off of the road to avoid getting hit by a car. I personally have biked on some roads where I had to use unpaved and uneven terrain on the side of the road and not only is it inconvenient, it is not safe at all and heavily discourages biking, which is one of the most efficient carbon neutral transportation methods.

More and more vehicles are going electric and now I think the biggest change that needs to happen with this is how expensive they are. If they were reasonable prices, more people could afford them, and I think that would help to lower the carbon levels in the air. Also, if you don't necessarily need to take bus or a car, then don't. If you can help, then do it!

I totally agree with the point that we could all do a bit extra in the factor of contributing to lower the carbon levels but it's hard when not everyone can afford the cost. Biking places and even walking to get exercise could be better.

I agree on biking, not only does a bike last for a pretty long time, it also keeps you in shape and reduces carbon levels.

I’m not very excited about electric cars becoming more popular, they’re not as reliable or accessible as a normal diesel car for example(even though the diesel produces a toooon of waste).

And also, CO2 emission for making one of these batteries is absolutely shocking. For example, a very popular electric car that you guys have probably seen since you live in America is the Tesla, made by Elon Musk. To make a lithium-ion battery for these cars to run on their “sustainable and totally non-polluting energy” the CO2 emissions are anywhere from 3120kg(about 3 tons) to 15.680 kg (about 16 tons)

For reference, after completing the survey, my carbon footprint is about 3.307kg per year. It would take me about 4,7 years to produce as much CO2, I would already be going to college by that age!!

It is absolutely terrifying to me

Hi. Here are the few materials that I have found that could be useful in future sustainable building. Please comment and reply if you have any ideas or suggestions about the materials.

1. Hempcrete - A sturdy and energy efficient material, could be a replacement for concrete, which costs a lot of gravel and stone to create. Hempcrete is very durable and lasts hundreds of years.

2. Bamboo - As one of the fastest growing woods used in construction, bamboo can be harvested in 1 ~ 5 years. It would serve as a great replacement for wood and cutting down trees.

3. Cork - Giant cork blocks provide as a significant material for building. Easy to produce, light, durable, and reusable.

4. Steel - A very recyclable yet extremely durable, commonly used in foundations and support beams, steel can be recycled indefinitely without losing quality, which makes it a extraordinary sustainable building material.
[img][/img]

whoops. what is wrong with the last image?

ill put another image of an example of a steel building here...

Another eco-friendly material that you could add to the list is straw bale. After the seeds have been extracted from grain harvests, the stalks are what are used to make straw. Straw may be used as mulch, animal bedding, food for livestock, and as part of a compost pile. This may seem like a weak material to build things, but when there's a lot of this straw stuck together it can make a building. It's dried out and it works well to build things.

Here is another eco-friendly material that can be used to build sustainable and eco-friendly homes. This eco-friendly material is sheep wool. Sheep wool can be used to cover the tops walls, side walls, and windows during cold seasons, instead of using heaters. Room heating and cooling accounts for 38% of family housing's greenhouse gas emissions in the US. Even though using heaters does not create pollution itself, the electricity used to make the heaters work does cause pollution. The coal (fossil fuel) is burned which sends harmful gases such as nitrogen oxides (NOx) and carbon dioxide (CO2). here is an example of a house covered in sheep wool.

Problems:

- Wind Turbines = Loud, no one wants to live near them.
- Solar Panels = Cannot store energy = No energy at night
- Hydropower = Limited energy, only works on dams
- Eco-Friendly Materials = Expensive, hard to acquire

Question: Can we replace all houses with sustainable houses?

pls comment ways to solve the problems / suggest more problems we have to solve about sustainable cities

Windows facing the Sun should be coated with solar films in order to generate electricity.

Hi Ray, if we continue not use that much solar panels, it will soon die out!

creating solar panels cost a LOT of energy

Solar panels are really expensive!

Solar panels are expensive but their maintenance cost is lower than electricity. Solar panels cut back on harmful pollutants including sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and pollutants as well as greenhouse gas emissions like CO2. And what some people do is that in the day they use the sunlight instead of using the solar panels. Then, when it starts to get dark the solar panels have already stored their energy from the day and they can use it at night. I have solar panel lights in the balcony in my house and that's what they do.

sorry. one of the problems i listed in the solar panels part, is wrong

turns out solar panels can store energy now.

sorry

When people are building wind turbines they usually build them in distant places where people don't usually live. They build them in areas like grasslands, places near the ocean, and mountains. Offshore wind turbines can contribute to the development of habitats for fish (turbine reefs) and other marine species.

WIND TURBINE IS EXPENSIVE. It is 4000 dollars to 8000 dollars per rated kilowatt.

I found out that there is something called concentrating solar thermal power. People build mirrors around a receiver and those mirrors reflect sunlight to the receiver to create heat and then into electricity. These things don't use direct sunlight so they can store energy when there is no sunlight or very little sunlight while regular solar panels can't. Still, people choose regular solar panels because they are cheaper.

Can you guys pls help me solve this problem:
What is the most efficient way of saving energy?

I think it is using electrical cars and changing food as in my carbon footprint, most come from my food.

hey there. if u ask me, electric cars don’t have sucha big difference. as my family also own an electric car, the energy efficiency, is not as good as u might think. 1 kilowatt can get u about 6 km…

besides, we also make pollution while generating electricity.

true thing about the food, pork and beef are surprisingly bad for the environment…

I think driving electrical cars or walk to somewhere, turning off the water when you are not using it, turning off the light when you are not using it, and eat more vegetables will be the most efficient way of saving energy. Then we can reduce carbon footprint.

To save energy, you can ride a bike to school or use solar panels to not use coal. You can use roof top solar panels or window coated solar panels if your window has a lot of sunlight all the time.

I don't think electric cars makes a big difference for less pollution. Since Taiwan's electricity have only less than 10% created by renewable energy. That means you just make those pollution from Taipei to Taichung where most of the thermal power plants are.

Would using sustainable materials like hempcrete and cork to build houses reduce carbon footprint?

Sadly, sustainable housing is expensive so not a lot of ppl wanna build them...

I think hempcrete would help since it looks pretty eco-friendly. "Lasts 100's of Years" and "Energy Efficient" definitely be a lot of help. Could you use the cork to make bottles instead of plastic bottles though? Maybe that would help...

I definitely agree with using sustainable materials.
But, a cheaper version you could use wood. But, in Japan people cut down old trees, since they absorb less CO2, and if they stay there it is not good for the environment. But remmeber to plant a tree back!

Using the wood of trees would be much cheaper but the tree would take half a century to fully grow. Yess, planting a tree would be a good idea but they could be overused and it’d take a lot of time for them to grow.

me to

isn't hemp a drug?

nevermind its marijuana

Using bamboo could be a great replacement for trees. It takes less than half the time to grow, and less animals use bamboo forests as a habitat compared to the vast amount of ecosystems destroyed when cutting down a forest.

And to answer your question about cork, cork is a very cheap and energy efficient material for used for building. (and wine stoppers) People can build with large blocks of compacted cork.

Here, I attached a picture of a house made mostly of straw and cork.

yeah but its made for building not a drug!!!

im bamboo

bamboo is a very efficient building material.

im not sure if hemp is a drug but hempCRETE is basically concrete but more energy efficient.

My city would have everything very close together so you can walk and bike instead of driving or other transportation. We would also entirely use wind, solar and hydro power to reduce the carbon emissions.

I think cities that have stores, etc. closer together would be able to start using bikes and walking more, because they can get to places they need to go easier. In the suburbs, or further outside cities, it would be harder for people to not use cars, so I think they would produce more CO2 emissions.

Cities could alter the way things are built to be closer meaning more places in walking or biking distance to prevent carbon emissions from everybody using cars, along with supplying areas to bike and places to rent bikes.

Wind turbines are extremely loud so no one wants to live near them, that's why they build em' in the oceans. The problem with solar energy is that you can't store the energy that it produces, meaning that if you run a house fully on solar panels, you would have zero energy at night.

How many people per city are using solar panels? How much of their total energy do they actually produce?

we should have more solar panels on our houses and building we also should have smog eating buildings

A sustainable city would be great. Everything would be electric and powered by the sun. All food would be organic.

Is taking public transportation better than driving? The short answer is yes. Taking public transportation reduces your carbon footprint more than small actions like adjusting the thermostat.
Here are the benefits:
1. By taking public transportation, you are supporting local organizations. You are giving your money to people that help your community rather than car companies who don't care about you or your loved ones.
2. You can multitask and get work done while on a public bus, for example.
3. You don't have to worry about hitting someone or getting in a car crash.
Overall, you should definitely start taking public transportation more. It is really easy to implement into your routine and daily schedule and it is the more sustainable option.

https://www.kcata.org/about_kcata/entri … nvironment.

As a community it is very important that we all work together to reduce and maintain a sustainable carbon footprint in our city. Our average carbon footprint as a city is important because we want to contribute as least as possible to climate change. There are many things we can do to reduce our numbers. First, many people may not realize but a lot of people leave lights on in the house when they are not being used, so we can start by not using electricity in the house when it is not necessary. Also we should begin to take into consideration on how much we travel by plane and car because that plays a major role in the increase of our carbon footprint. Lastly we should start to think about the health of our city and earth which will make us more conscious of our action.

No matter where we come from or how we were raised, we all live on earth. and because we all live on this planet, it is our job to care for it because it provides for us. In the 21st century, we use cars, buy fast fashion, use plastic bottles etc. many people try to live a more sustainable life, which is amazing. But to truly make a difference, we need to be sustainable as a community. For example, there are many companies such as Shein, Forever 21, Romwe, and H&M, that promote fast fashion. Fast fashion is a dangerous concept. Because trends change quickly meaning that when people are done wearing their trendy clothes they just throw them away. Instead of shopping at stores and companies that offer clothes one will only use for a short period of time, we can invest in small businesses and secondhand stores, as we would be reusing materials. Another example is transportation. cars use up a lot of natural materials that are very valuable. Each year a typical driver emmits about 4.6 metric tons of carbon dioxide per year. (www.epa.gov). Carbon dioxide is one of the main greenhouse gasses which traps heat into the earth's atmosphere, which we know is why climate change has appeared. In 2022 there will be over 7 billion people on earth (www.census.gov).  excluding children and people without drivers licenses, that is still many people emitting carbon dioxide into the planet's atmosphere. To make the world more sustainable, nations can assign certain days of the week where people take public transportation or ride bikes to work or school. Although this may not be the more convenient option rather than driving a car, saving the planet is the most ideal option in my opinion. Like I had mentioned before, it is good that many people are beginning to be more sustainable with their actions. But to make a large difference, we need to come together as a community to make a change that will last. This means reducing our carbon footprint by consuming less fast fashion, using less plastic, using public transport, investing in solar panels, composting, and much more. We can make a change,  but we need to work together.

A common misunderstanding in the science community is that global warming and climate change are the same.  According to NASA, the term "global warming" refers to the long-term heating of Earth's climate system.  This is greatly caused by humans' actions of burning fossil fuels.  Climate change, on the other hand, is a long-term change in Earth's weather patterns.  To end up reaching the goal of having a sustainable city, it must be understood by the members of the community the differences in these terms and how they relate to each other.  While electric cars have made a name in the automobile industry, the manufacturers of these cars aren't especially good at making them affordable for all citizens.  One way to reduce carbon footprints around the city and make it a more sustainable environment is to make all public transportation methods electric and affordable.  Making them electric is just one thing, but making them affordable will draw a larger amount of people, making them more susceptible to being able to participate.  For example, when spending a week in San Francisco, it was easy to hop on a trolley train (no gas required) and get to my desired location within walking distance in the city.  Being such a big city like San Francisco, without this method of transportation I would expect their carbon footprint to be even higher!  In addition, according to the NASA Global Climate Change, just last year on February 25th, the UN Launched an Earth Observation Toolkit for Sustainable Cities and Human Development.  For citizens to see such a big organization such as the UN take on this role, it might inspire some to take a closer look at what they can do to help their city.  By more members getting involved and being aware of this cause, it will ultimately help the city be more environmentally friendly.  Getting started by involving yourself in these topics may benefit your community by spreading the word and creating a cause that will last a lifetime.  It just takes one person to start!

https://climate.nasa.gov/resources/glob … te-change/
https://appliedsciences.nasa.gov/our-im … ettlements

“Mass production of plastics, which began just six decades ago, has accelerated so rapidly that it has created 8.3 billion metric tons—most of it in disposable products that end up as trash.” 

A lot of stores and companies use single-use plastics which can only be used once before being thrown away. They are used because they are cheap, but they create a lot of waste. Companies for the most part do whatever makes/saves them the most money. If we ban single use plastics companies will have no choice but to stop using them.

According to national geographic, 91% of the world's plastic isn’t recycled. “Of the 8.3 billion metric tons that has been produced, 6.3 billion metric tons has become plastic waste.” (That's roughly 76% of all the world's plastic.) “Of that, only nine percent has been recycled.” 79% of the plastic that isn’t recycled ends up in the landfill or as litter. At some point most of the plastic goes into the ocean. Of course some of the plastic that ends up in the landfill is reusable, but if we ban single use plastics, we will be able to cut down on most of our plastic waste.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/scie … nvironment

I agree. Although banning single use plastics all over the world would be a great challenge, encouraging companies to utilize reusable packaging would be a great way to create positive change.

I say an alternative to just banning single use plastic world wide (that would be a challenge) i say we take baby steps into shipping products with no plastic, slowly making products without the plastic and inside make it with something reusable or bio-degradable.

Single use plastics are found everywhere. Weather they are in stores or on the side of the road, they are not good. We need to be cautious of plastics and if we use them we have to dispose of them properly.

I agree that single-use plastics only are useful to us once, and then cause more trouble than good after we throw them away. It’s already clear that animals and habitats all over the world are being affected, and if we continue to create and use so many single-use plastics the problem is only going to get worse. If it’s too difficult to eliminate plastic altogether then it would at least be better to use more plastic that is recyclable, and set up more infrastructure to be able to actually recycle most or all of it, as the majority of plastic used today is not recycled because it’s expensive and easier to just throw in the landfill than recycle it.

Hi, in France we have a law which fordbid the single-use plastic gradualy. Straws, plates and tumblers are concerned. The goal is to substitute the plastic by recycle cardboard.

Hi, in France we have a law which fordbids the single-use plastic gradualy. Straws, plates and cups are concerned. The goal is to substitute plastic by recycled and recyclable cardboard.

I agree that substituting single-use plastics with other resources is beneficial and a good step towards sustainability, however depending on the manufacturer and shipping method, the production of cardboard still can produce large carbon emissions damaging the atmosphere of not only cities but the entire world. I think using reusable utensils can be the most beneficial, however recyclable materials are still a better option for take-out or shopping bags when you forget than plastic.

I think that, to improve our planet, we should focus on cities.
In fact, they are one of the main sources of pollution.
So we should start limiting all sources of pollution that we can.

This is a wonderful point. In a search I made, I discovered further information on cities especially transportation in large citys, including the statistic that transportation accounts for roughly 30% of worldwide carbon emissions. Up to 70% of these pollutants are produced solely by automobiles. Many of the responses suggested that instead of driving, people bike or walk to their destinations. Although these solutions may be feasible over short distances and in some conditions, not everyone will be able to totally eliminate automobiles from their lives. As a result, it's critical to acknowledge that there are other strategies to minimize transportation-related emissions. Carpooling, taking public transportation, or investing in an electric or hybrid automobile, if you can afford it, are some of these options.

I think that one step that cities could take, while it is a big step, is to to convert trains to electric trains and make them more accessible to the public so there aren’t too many trains and people won’t really need to take personal transportation because trains can take them there while reducing the carbon footprint

Trains also can carry many people which would help with traffic in bigger city’s. As well as other public transportation.

Bullet trains are a technology that was invented in Japan during the 60s, and is a very viable solution to being more energy and time efficient.

A few facts about bullet trains:

-Facilitates cross-city economic integration and promotes the growth of smaller cities by connecting them with larger cities
-Reduces smog
-High speed trains could reverse the current tendency for cities to sprawl as wide as they can, with lots of new growth on the fringes and a neglected city center. A high speed rail network could revitalize America’s ‘Main Streets’.
-Less traffic
-Much safer than driving
-Run on electricity

A walking city is a type of city that is created to avoid internal transportation,
and therefore be small enough that a person can use walking to navigate the city.
It is characterized by narrow, often winding streets. If we could repurpose our cities
infrastructures around walking instead of driving in cars, we could see several benefits.

-Helps you stay active throughout busy days
-Allows social equality because everyone is a Pedestrian
-Reduces the environmental footprint caused by personal vehicles
-It favors the local economy and local business
-The smaller the community the bigger difference you make
-Save on transportation costs

In my city we would have a whole network of above and below ground electric trains around the city. This is because one major part of my carbon footprint was from transportation both from air travel and car travel. Although I do not travel very far within my community, I do travel to those close places very frequently like school. You could charge a small fee to get on the train to help pay for the expenses too, similar to the purpose of tollbooths. Electric Trains could make a profit for the city while also reducing everyone’s overall carbon emissions.

Vehicles such as cars and motorcycles are a significant contributor to the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. However, solutions are already being presented to change this. One of those solutions is electric cars, which produce far less CO2 emissions than regular cars. Unfortunately, electric cars are still not very common, and one of the reasons for this is that these cars need to use charging stations in order to recharge. These charging stations are not very common, and one step towards building a sustainable city is making these charging stations more widely available, as this will likely increase the popularity of electric cars.

I agree 100% with you.

I agree with your ideas. I think that your ideas are very good and will definitely help deal with the world's carbon problem.

I think this is something that would help the environment a lot. I think we should make the charging faster for electric cars and have more charging stations available.

I think the main issue we have with electric car charging stations is not the amount we have in urban areas but rather the suburban/rural charging network. Looking at maps of chargers in the US I can see that the big and small cities have plenty of chargers. Places like Maine and other small-population states have very weak networks. There is barely any way for someone to travel around the state of Maine on electric charge effectively. Many of the chargers that do exist in Maine are level 2 which also detract from the overall appeal of an electric vehicle.

Yes CharlieC, I completely agree. As a resident of a low-population state with an electric car I can confidently say that the infrastructure for wide-spread electric car use just does’t exist yet. Even with an electric car that we can charge at home, we still have to take our gas-powered vehicle on long trips out of state because there just aren’t enough chargers. In order for electric car use to be a practical carbon reducing solution everywhere, more and faster charging infrastructure has to be implemented. However, I am confident that this will happen eventually, because transportation is one of the most carbon emitting systems and improving this will be crucial.

I believe that many of these points are true, but that electric vehicles shouldn’t be a long term solution. Electric vehicles are still individual vehicles that require energy to be run, which comes from plants that often don’t implement green strategies. They are better than gas, but even making them using lithium that is mined. Mining is not only bad for the environment, it is often done in humanely. I think that though electric vehicles are amazing and should be used over gas vehicles, they should be used with the end goal of more accessible public transportation.

I think green cities are one of the most important things we can do for environmental of our planet because the cities pollute a lot, we breathe the air of the cities and if the air is unhealthy we could have serious problems, for example at out respiratory system.
So i think green cities could be a fundamental object for a green planet.

Allowing more plants to grow on buildings, like vines and such would be a great idea for getting more greening in cities. We can’t get rid of cities so why not advance them.

I agree.  So much of cities in concrete and cement.  Not only does it feel like eye pollution, but just imagine the habitats that thrived there before.  If we just allow more plants, mini forests and gardens to be made for the small sacrifice of a couple apartment building, we could see better air qualities and a more natural beauty withen our cities.

One of the main producers of carbon in the atmosphere are vehicles like cars, tractors, motorcycles, and even buses. Vehicles like these release about 4.5 metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere per year. So, one thing that I would do to reduce the amount of carbon in the atmosphere would be to replace vehicles with electric vehicles since electric vehicles use electricity to run instead of gas or fuel. Charging stations would also need to be installed in more places for electric vehicles to recharge.

I agree

I agree with you, but there a lot of cars that use fuel and it is impossible to change every car in the world because there are some poor countries that haven't got enough electricity to load their car. There is olso a problem connected to planes that pollute a lot. Electric cars would surely improve the environmental issue, but in my opinion the road is still long.

I agree

I would most definitely agree that gas powered vehicles are some of the biggest fossil fuel contributors and electric vehicles are the future. I think we have already come a long way in terms of finding ways to make more electric vehicles but I also understand that the US has this financial ability and resources whereas other countries will suffer with this. I have a lot of hope for the future of electric vehicles. We have a long way to go but I think we are on the right track.

I think that one big step towards a sustainable city and reducing our carbon footprint for a healthier environment is by converting to electric cars.I think this step is a keystone towards a more sustainable city.Especially considering how much carbon they put of into our world.

yes i agree because to have a sustainable city we need a lot of resources and we need to have more carbom

I agree with you, Grant, cars have a very big impact on the environment. Another idea for a green city could be planting a lot of plants to decrease carbon dioxide level.

I think the same.
we have to reduce our carbon footprint and we also have to change maybe using the electric car.
In my personal opinion, we have to start now, we have to extremely reduce our carbon footprint.

I agree with you, it would be a big step forward, but the problems are many. The first is obviously the high costs of electric cars, and the second is that not all petrol stations are equipped with charging turrets for electric cars.

I think that, to improve our planet, we should focus on cities.
In fact, they are one of the main sources of pollution.
So we should start limiting all sources of pollution that we can.

I believe that most of the things are heating up the earth are cars or any traveling transportation.
I think that there are a lot of ways to go from one place to another without using cars. For example, we can use bikes and even walk. These are both great forms of exercise and won't do any harm or cause climate change.

When making a city we should think about adding more plant life into the city like trees and flowers. Make it easier to travel by bike and have accessible buses and other transportation.

when we create houses we could add plants, flowers, trees to make our city more beautiful and liveable

I totally aggree. After all it is boring to live in a city where there are no trees and flowers and boring is not happy. Happier city is a better city.

I completely agree with you, for years now architects and engineers have working hand in hand to try and develop new building materials that would increase a building structural load limit. Part of the reason why bigger plants with complex root systems cant be on top of building is because of the weight carrying capacity of metals like Titanium. While these metals themselves are extremally strong, they wouldn't be able to support the weight of trees, water, soil and micro organisms that would be needed to keep the plant life alive.

Link for picture of a building-https://www.google.com/search?q=sustainable+architecture&rlz=1C1VDKB_enUS986US986&sxsrf=APq-WBveRHYGCr7Fy4U3O9QGby6GowBs3Q:1646373002749&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj-iPyv4av2AhWml2oFHeeSDJAQ_AUoAnoECAIQBA&biw=1536&bih=714&dpr=1.25#imgrc=2PJ27QdDDqqm9M

Link for picture of a building-https://www.google.com/search?q=sustainable+architecture&rlz=1C1VDKB_enUS986US986&sxsrf=APq-WBveRHYGCr7Fy4U3O9QGby6GowBs3Q:1646373002749&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj-iPyv4av2AhWml2oFHeeSDJAQ_AUoAnoECAIQBA&biw=1536&bih=714&dpr=1.25#imgrc=B_6pFbi4lTOCYM&imgdii=o7Fs77Dd-6mFKM

Unfortunately we are a long ways away from being able to create and maintain buildings like the ones in the pictures. This is due to the enormous amount of weight that these building would need to be capable of carrying as well as the amount of space that would need to be provided for them. I believe that a good start is simply trying to put more grow beds on the tops of skyscrapers and encouraging people to keep plant life and greenery along the sides of some of the worlds biggest buildings.

What is your daily routine? I wake up, brush my teeth, get dressed, and drive to school; which is about 30 minutes away from my house - every Monday through Friday. This may not seem like much of an impact on one person's ecological footprint but when you add in the fact that millions of Americans do this every day in one city, the impact on the environment is quite noticeable. Air pollution, wasteful use of water, lack of vegetation, and other things negatively impact the environment - most of the impact comes from major cities such as Singapore and Manila. Is it possible to turn these major cities into more ecological sustaining ones?

Let's take a look at Curitiba, Brazil. The city houses 3,770,919 people, currently, but also manages to live sustainably; how is this possible? Well, for starters, the city has a mass transit, or bus, system that between 70 - 80% of the population uses - which result in a 25% lower carbon emission per capita than the average for Brasilian cities.

Brazil is infamous for having unplanned slums inhabited by disenfranchised members of society: favelas; but Curitiba found an extremely successful way of giving work for these members of society without having to build new buildings or tearing down nature. Curitiba has a program that encourages the populace to clean the city by exchanging trash and recyclables for bus tokens, food, and cash. As a result, the city is very clean and not dependent on the government to create support for menial labor.

The city is also designed around the people, not politics or vehicles. This means that the way buildings are structured is so that they benefit and promote an ecological lifestyle. One way this is shown is that housing buildings have retail, or grocery stores, on the first two levels so that the people living there have a place to go shopping without leaving the building.

Major cities impact the environment greatly but suburban areas are also making ecological dents. Many Americans live in single-family homes, use water and electricity, and drive to and from places. As a result, a single family can have a major impact on the environment just by their style of living.

One of the world's most successful models for sustainable urban development is in the Vauban district of Freiburg in southern Germany. Along with an energy-efficient tramway that the population uses, they have banned the use of vehicles within the city. This encourages citizens to either walk, bicycle or use the tramway which not only decreases carbon emissions but also keeps roads safe for children and other pedestrians on the street.

Can these sustainable practices be implemented worldwide? The short answer: yes, these practices can be implemented in every city but problems present themselves. One of these problems is funding. Freiburg was funded by a private company. The U.S. government uses our tax dollars to pay city workers and fund programs such as medicare; getting them to pay for a rework of our current sewage system would take much convincing. The U.S. also has a strong opposition towards the removal of motor vehicles because they play a huge role in our daily lives.

Bibliography

Barth, Brian. “Curitiba: The Greenest City on Earth.” The Ecologist, The Resurgence Trust, 17 Nov. 2017, https://theecologist.org/2014/mar/15/curitiba-greenest-city-earth#:~:text=A%20pastoral%20city,greenest'%20city%20in%20the%20world.

Thorpe, David. “The World's Most Successful Model for Sustainable Urban Development?” Smart Cities Dive, Industry Dive, 2022, https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/ex/sust … nt/229316/.

To create a city which has a low greenhouse gas impact I think that it is necessary to have an intricate subway system which is based on renewable energy. This railway system would also have to be very fast so that it would encourage people to take the subway rather than drive cars. This city also should have a lot of trees so some of the Carbon Dioxide can be converted into Oxygen. Cars based on nonrenewable energy should be taxed highly in this city. Bike trails should be created throughout the city so that biking is encouraged. There should also be a lot of bike shops.

I agree with your ideas on reducing carbon in the atmosphere. I think that people should ride bikes, skateboards, and other things like these more often instead of cars.

At the end of 2018, the American agricultural machinery manufacturer John Deere presented the prototype of its first electric and autonomous tractor, which did not require the intervention of a driver, so it dispensed with the cabin. For the electrical supply, it received it through a cable connected to the network, so it did not need batteries for its operation.

A year later, the FPT Industrial and STEYR CNH Industrial brands presented the STEYR Konzept, a new hybrid tractor concept developed jointly, whose diesel engine is not connected to the wheels but recharges a modular battery that powers four electric motors located in the wheels.

In January of this year Kubota will celebrate the 130th anniversary of its foundation by presenting the Kubota X-tractor: an electric, autonomous tractor with artificial intelligence that advances the future of the so-called 'intelligent agriculture'.

The point is that to build an electric tractor requires equipment that has not yet been manufactured/invented.
They can advance on smart farming but I imagine what battery you need to harvest 25km of field.

the city would look kinda basic and modern but small because there is not alot of resources.

First and foremost, we'd need to convert everything to clean energy sources, like renewable and nuclear energy. Also, we would need public transportation and also use electric cars to reduce carbon.

First and foremost, we'd need to convert everything to clean energy sources, like renewable and nuclear energy. Also, we would need public transportation and also use electric cars to reduce carbon.

Ritengo che sia fondamentale , che per ridurre l'anidride carbonica bisogna fare dei comportamenti virtuosi. Le soluzioni potrebbero essere: usare la bici nei luoghi vicini, fare la raccolta differenziata, usare mezzi di trasporto elettrici, piantare alberi.

I feel like if more students especially high schoolers and middle schoolers rode public transportation to and from school the carbon footprint would decrease greatly. Since parents take their kids to school in the morning all of those emissions being released from all of the different cars adds to the amount of Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

How is it that in a time of rapid increase of carbon New York City has had a 15% drop in Carbon rates from 2004-2016? A big part of this is that New York has a growing and in use public transit system. What ideas could help move this into more spread out city's.

I think it's necessary to make an impact with policymakers who will be apportioning budgets to things such as public transit budgets as well as laws that could incentivize using individual cars less, which would both help decrease carbon output. I also think getting the word out on what NYC has been doing right is very important for people to see how impactful and relatively convenient these changes are.

I agree with you. I recently went to New York City over the summer, and the Subway system is great because it is so intricate, and it is used by so many people that carbon emissions are definitely being cut. I think other cities should definitely adopt this system because it is very efficient and it cuts carbon emissions by a lot.

In your own opinion what do you think are some necessary changes we need to make in our own city to make them sustainable? Just think about simple things you can do everyday that could possibly help make your city more sustainable to live in.

Convert to a diffrent method of producing energy like windmills or solar pannels. Also make it easy to walk everywhere without putting people in a dangerous situation.

I think we can advertise to stop leaving trash on streets, and if there are, we will have teams to clean it up.

since our city is not large enough to make large-scale public transportation such as subway systems worthwhile, I think we should focus on solar energy, smaller-scale public transportation, as well as encouraging people to get exercise by walking on short trips instead of driving.

Public transportation would be a solution to reducing citizens' carbon footprints. Why not have many people use a bus or train at the same time, instead of having everyone use their vehicles? Bikes could also be a solution, but not everyone will use them. With bikes, the citizens wouldn't be able to get around faster and would be late to events or work.

I have noticed especially in my city, there is a great lack of public transportation. This means that most people must rely on their own cars to get around leading to a greater use of fossil fuels.

I have noticed especially in my city, there is a great lack of public transportation. This means that most people must rely on their own cars to get around leading to a greater use of fossil fuels.

When most people think of nuclear they think of danger, when it is more energy and space efficient than fossil fuels and renewable energy sources. Additionally is a much more safe than fossil fuel environmentally though not as much as renewable energy in most cases.

I totally agree about that. Nuclear energy is the most beneficial type of energy we have today. Although it is a good source of energy, in the United states there has been a lot of nuclear power plants closures when in reality we should be building more nuclear power plants to promote good energy use.

I am a city planner with a goal of low-carbon transportation.  In regards to transportation, my first instinct is to make everyone walk or ride their bike, but then I realize that isn’t very practical at all.  Then I go to electric cars for all residents, but that would not only be impractical but also hideously expensive.  I then find my solution.  A system of trains, as clean as I can get them, that run across the city is a waffle pattern, going both north to south and east to west, with one train per road.  The roads would be train tracks (there would be sidewalks, of course); people would either walk, ride bikes, or ride the trains.  Even if one broke down, a person would only have to walk a single block to find the next one.

A sustainable city is a city designed with consideration of impacts on the environment and economy. It is also designed to be improved upon in future generations, which will keep the city up to date with the best environment friendly things.

As a start, cities could have a lower carbon footprint if a sufficient number of facilities like schools and workplaces were placed very close to homes, this way, less travel and therefore less greenhouse gases would be needed for people to reach their daily destination. Fortunately many, but not all cities have already had this. Additionally, the widespread use of free public transportation would also lower the city's carbon footprint. Things like buses, if not electric, produce more emissions than one car, but if the bus is usually at full capacity, the emissions per capita are lower than if everyone drove a car each. It would be even better if electric buses could be used instead.

I agree with what you are saying about trying to place schools and workplaces in more efficient areas around homes. I do think though many cities are trying to pivot into a full public transportation model. With busses, ubers, and trams, they are making progress into this initiative. The pandemic had a big halt in public transportation as it turned into more of a comfort problem over an easier ride problem. I think with the pandemic slowly getting better, cities will start to go back into full ride share/public transportation mode.

An ideal sustainable city would probably be one that has low carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions, not a lot of factories which leads to reduced pollution, and not a lot of cars since cars contribute to pollution as well. A sustainable city should also have recycling areas, and the selling of environmentally friendly products in stores. A sustainable city should have public transportation as well. Sustainable cities are important because they reduce the amount of greenhouse gases being sent into the atmosphere, and thus reducing things like climate change. Sustainable cities also reduce the carbon footprint of a city.

I agree wholeheartedly! Establishing a system of public transportation that's actually good is really important. Europe has done such a good job of it already. If other leading world countries modeled themselves after that and/or built upon what they already have, public transportation would be amazing! And not only public transportation, but also cities of green, too. Green roofs, green walls, plants and trees in every conceivable location! It would do an amazing job of keeping the cities cooler and the air cleaner. And not only those things either! There is so much more humans can do to make our cities more sustainable!

First and foremost, we'd need to convert everything to clean energy sources, like renewable and nuclear energy. We would need to establish a strong system of public transportation and also adopt the use of electric cars all over. Along with that, we'd need to build car charging stations (like gas stations) for said electric cars. We'd need to reduce the amount of concrete and cement used in our streets, sidewalks, buildings, etc. A way to keep cities cooler and to keep the air cleaner is to have green roofs everywhere, it would also help minimize the carbon dioxide. A sustainable city should also be designed in such a way that navigating it with a car isn't an absolute must, it should be walkable and bikeable. And these are only a few things, there is so, so much more we could do to make a city more sustainable.

Consumerism is a big part of the worlds pollution, and a lot of consumers come from big cities. I don't have an exact plan for an ideally sustainable city but I have some ideas that could help people and our planet. Recycling bins already exist in an abundance in cities but there aren't nearly enough as there should be, these should be readily available for the public so that recycling is encouraged. Some stores like this exist but I really liked the idea of stores that would let you reuse your containers and fill them with store-able foods or cleaning products,there should most certainly be more stores like this that could help reduce the amount of plastic and other polluting materials in food packaging. Let me know if you have any other ideas that could help make cities better!

This saying is very common and well known around the world. However what many people don’t know is that they’re supposed to follow this saying in the order it is in. First, try to reduce your plastic use as much as possible and try to reduce the amount of meat you eat in your weekly meals. Next, reuse as much as possible along so you don’t even have to recycle in the first place since many plastics actually cannot be recycled. Finally, recycle, if you cannot find a way to reduce or reuse, RECYCLE!

I 100% agree with your final statement, a lot of people find it difficult to reduce or  reuse what the consume, but recycling is a very easy and helpful thing to do that can be implement in any city environment.

My family don't drive cars that run on gas anymore, instead we travel using electric cars. Since they aren't using gas, they aren't polluting the environment with tons of carbon dioxide. Therefore, they wouldn't contribute to the greenhouse gases unlike gas and diesel vehicles.

From what I've heard, electric vehicles don't actually help the environment much. The production process causes a lot more greenhouse gases compared to the process used to create traditional cars. You probably don't want to rely solely on this for environmental conservation.

Some cities, as they are right now, have existing waste collection services, which are sponsored by the public.  These services greatly help us reduce our carbon footprint by recycling materials and grouping garbage.  In order to lower global carbon footprint, there should be more services like these, or adopt existing public services.

I have no idea how to implement this, but maybe get rid of the amount of gas and fuels that are emitted from factories. If we get rid of that, it could help immensely

This is a good point. Putting laws in place that strictly limit the amount of gas and fuel a factory is allowed to use can help limit pollution.

Most people when they hear about nuclear fusion as a power source they associate it with being dangerous and especially bad for the environment. What most people don't realize is just how efficient and environmentally friendly nuclear power actually is. Yes, you heard that right. As ridiculous as it sounds, nuclear power plants actually produce no carbon dioxide, the leading gas that contributes to the atmosphere. According to energysage.com, energy.gov, and various other sources, nuclear power is actually extremely efficient. One uranium pellet that is less than one inch can produce as much energy as one ton of coal, and 120 barrels of oil. The following quote is from energysage.com, the website I cited earlier. "According to the Department of Energy, a typical nuclear facility producing 1,000 megawatts (MW) of electricity takes up about one square mile of space. Comparatively, a wind farm producing the same amount of energy takes 360x more land area, and a large-scale solar farm uses 75x more space. That’s 431 wind turbines or 3.125 million (!!!) solar panels." This quote alone showcases the true efficiency of nuclear power. Sadly, as you would expect, (since it is so efficient and yet not the leading source of energy) it has as many pros as it does cons. Again, according to energysage.com, nuclear reactors are powered by uranium, which is technically not renderable. This is because uranium is an element found in the earth's crust, and therefore it is limited, of course. It also takes energy to mine it, therefore having negative effects as well. Since it is powered by uranium, it produces nuclear waste, as you would expect. This waste is highly radioactive, which means it takes a lot of money to package it safely away. Again, as you would expect, it is also very dangerous. Finally, to add onto the money problem, while nuclear reactors don't take much money to run while they are already built, building them is a whole other story; very expensive. In conclusion, nuclear reactors would probably be one of the best solutions to this energy crisis without these cons. One day, if we manage to find a safer, more renewable and yet just as efficient energy source for these reactors, it may be just the solution we are looking for.

In addition, carbon emissions actually cause more deaths than nuclear reactors. Though, yes, some people have died from meltdowns, have suffered cancer among other things, more people have suffered through pollutants, lung diseases, and similar horrible effects.

But sadly the reason people don't trust it, is because the deaths caused by nuclear reactors are much more directly visible than carbon emissions.

Our current environment is loaded with human caused greenhouse gases, which come from burning fossil fuels, coal, natural gas, and petroleum. In a city where I would be mayor, I would promote urban agriculture. It would shorten supply chains meaning the amount of Co2 emitted from transporting goods would also decrease. I would also have a good plan for reducing and managing food waste, with loads of recycling. I would get electrical public transportation and other huge moving devices to decrease the amount of
Co2 that comes from cars and buses. I would also join with many charities so that if people want to help and donate, there will be many resources. Clean energy with solar panels and wind energy. Planting many trees and many other plants that helps with the Co2.

Promoting urban agriculture is a great idea. A lot of people who live in cities don't have access to healthy food. Urban agriculture could provide these people with fresh fruits and vegetables. Also, if a lot of plants started being grown in the city the air would become a bit less polluted. Overall people would be happier and healthier if there were more urban agriculture.

Would it be possible to recycle plastic into walls for homes and stuff? Plastic houses would be cool.

A more sustainable city should have specific laws promoting sustainability, like a limit on the amount of plastic used in products there. Downsizing apartments/living spaces in general would help make the most use out of less land. An inexpensive and accessible public transportation system would also be an important aspect of reducing pollution from cars. Lastly, urban farming methods (hydroponics, aeroponics, vertical farming)—which optimize the crop for a small amount of space—would also reduce the carbon emissions that would be produced by transporting food.

I thoroughly agree. This would create a safer environment for all living creatures, and would greatly help our population reach a healthier level of food, pollution, etc.

There are many ways to make out city more sustainable. Some including, switching to reusable/sustainable energy, having less food waste by donating food, eat less dairy and animal products/ eating more vegan/vegetarian meals, banning or reducing single-use plastics, having a better recycling system, having a compost system. Those are just some of the ways we can make out city more sustainable.

For a sustainable city I would walk with electric vehicles such as scooters and bicycles to avoid polluting and open up many green spaces.

In My opinion, for a sustanable city you ha e to use Wind and solar Energy, use Electric machines, walk with bicycles or on foot when it IS appropriate, plant more trees, more vegetation, make separate Collection well and recycle plastic

Let's take care not only of ourselves but also of the environment through the choices we make. I have decided not to use plastic anymore.

in my city, the highest carbon footprint that we leave on average is in the home category. this is because lights are left on, things are kept plugged in, and things are used more than needed. as a whole, we need to figure out ways to cut down the carbon footprint within homes. I think we could work on getting more efficient lights and appliances in houses that will limit the amount of carbon released into the air.

You are so right!

riding bikes, electric cars, solar power, and recycling can do a lot to help as well

I agree. I also think solar power is a great solution to use if you can afford to.

I think our community should start using more electric transportation such as cars, buses, trains, and start carpooling or walking more. This will contribute to our earth by polluting less and emitting fewer greenhouse gasses. We have the technology for fully electric and sustainable cars so we should use it more and advertise to our community how much better it is for the environment and it's also financially stable.

I completely agree with your ideas about electric vehicles. However, it is not as simple as it seems. There are numerous reasons why people in our communities don't use electric vehicles. I think the main deterrent in private transportation is price. In most communities, money is a large issue for families. Purchasing expensive electric cars to only slightly change your carbon footprint is not worth it to many families. The main issue with larger, commercial transportation is also issues with money. To large companies, switching to electric vehicles only loses the company money. With investors watching their every move, large companies feel pressured to do everything they can to make money; even if it means destroying the environment. The best way to overcome these monetary issues is to have company leaders that are not 100% driven by money. If CEOs are concerned about the planet, they could reduce costs for electric vehicles even if it loses their company money.

Sources:
https://www.nrdc.org/stories/electric-v … r-drive-ev
https://www.automobilemag.com/news/elec … n-america/
https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/why … %20anxiety.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmorri … 862a8d16f4

There is already a lot more electric cars and i would also love to see more, and more electric buses and trains.

I love this idea! Electric monorails buses can cars could be a huge part of the solution.

I totally agree, making vehicles electric would help a lot.

I agree with part of your opinion it is great that humans are trying to find more sustainable energy source. However, there is one problem. From what I hear lithium ion batteries aren't fully sustainable either. EV companies are running out of options and are even thinking of getting lithium from the ocean.
Feel free to correct me if i have something misinterpreted.

Electric cars are a greate way to stop air pollution by dangerous fumes.There are some difficulties with this types of cars, like a high price and expensive electricity.I hope, in a short time these problems will solved and all cars will be electric.

In this sustainable city, there will be many trees/plants/lakes, eco-friendly materials, recycling bins/composting bins/general trash bins, the city will mostly operate on renewable energy, gardens, there will be electric buses, places to park bikes, and charging areas for electric cars. Electric cars are more expensive compared to regular cars. So, only some people would buy them. People would be encouraged to walk or bike for short distances or take electric buses. There would be laws on not to litter, to recycle, to use less paper, etc. People would also be encouraged to eat locally grown food.

To make a city sustainable, there needs to be laws and procedures set in place to make the environment, people, and animals who live there safe. One recommendation that we could do is encourage people to walk or bike short distances. This will lower Co2 emissions from cars and will save you gas money. There should also be community gardens for citizens to take part in growing food for themselves and the community. Community gardens are sustainable, good for the environment, and cuts down less forested land. People could also get paid to pick up plastic and other trash littered around the city, so it won't end up in the ocean or on an animal. Lastly, all buildings should be powered by renewable energy sources like solar panels or wind power!

There are some parts that aren't feasible to some countries and cities, but most of your points are valid. Cities are definitely starting to, or already are, encouraging carbon-neutral transportations, but some of those cities don't have the correct amenities to support that network, and you can't just place those bike lanes willy-nilly, people want their parking for their gas-guzzlers, and bike networks are distracting and may lower land value to the homeowners on said street. City planners need to find routes that are used, and may need to call mulligans, which cost time and money.
It is generally agreed that gas prices are getting higher and higher, discouraging drivers from driving, but still paying for the car running fuel. People are also not willing to take the jump for a gas car to an electric car, because they fear that they can't afford it. They are not willing to take the jump because they don't know the implications, whether it be good or bad, but it seems that (don't quote me on this) that getting an electric car actually saves you more money in the long run, but people are just too scared to make the jump over.
There aren't many criticisms against community gardens, (that I know of) but they can't rival the amount of food produced at a farm. I said in an earlier post that unless you develop a way to grow vast sums of food in a small space consistently and for a low price, we still need to stick to importing/eating farm grown foods.
Picking up trash from city properties are definitely good things, but most people don't want to handle trash, and depending on how much you pay. Most people already have day jobs that probably pay more, which leaves the weekends. Then again, earning some extra bucks over the weekend is good, but they want the weekends off, not doing work. Also, where will the money come from?
Renewable energy is good, but they are still expensive compared to building up an oil or coal power plant and burning it for energy. The reason developing countries burn fuels is because that they don't have the funding to construct these renewable sources, not to mention other amenities like housing and water, so unless we give them the funding and the parts, they'll keep burning things up until the have a stable and growing economy.

In today's world, we use a lot of plastic. Plastic has become a staple of today's economy, even though it's incredibly harmful to the environment. It is usually hard or impossible to recycle, and it fills the ocean and landfills. People are trying to cut down on plastic, as are companies, but they aren't doing it correctly. If I go to any local restaurant, I may see paper straws, and if I go to the grocery store I may see brown paper bags instead of plastic ones. This looks like a lot of progress on the surface, but there are so many other steps that need to be taken. The straws are hardly a problem in a restaurant when compared to the plastic drink containers, to-go boxes, and other frequently used plastic items. In grocery stores people want to focus on the bags at checkout, rather than the plastic packaging on every single item, without fail. Our millions of packages are shipped with plastic Styrofoam packing peanuts, and drinks are bought in small plastic bottles. Companies need to use less plastic whenever possible, and we as consumers need to try buying from more sustainable sources. If companies have profit to gain from becoming more green, they will. We need to do our part, so that those with no regard for the environment will be forced to change.

I 100% agree with you the world is cutting down plastic but, not cutting down some large consumers. Such as, take out boxes, packing peanuts, and, small plastic bottles. I can attest to seeing paper straws and paper bags in restaurants and grocery stores however, it's not as much to the point where we don't have to talk or worry about it. Majority of grocery stores are still using plastic bags (especially local ones), the bigger chains are starting to reduce the amount of them by advertising cloth bags. Big fast food chains are still using plastic straws as well, some include Starbucks. These two are the most well known and have alternatives. The other ones you mentioned also have possible alternatives. For example using hard plastic containers instead of Styrofoam containers for takeout and using recycled paper instead of packing peanuts. An alternative for plastic water bottle could be just getting people to buy a reusable water bottle and have water fill up stations around the city. We can do our part to save the world!

Making cities sustainable would provide a huge help to our Global Crisis. Cities consume 80% of the worlds energy and produce more than 60% of the total Carbon emissions and yet they only occupy a small fraction of the earth's surface. We can make cities sustainable by using wind and solar power, recycle and use electric vehicles.

Sam_nocera, I agree with your take on sustainable cities. I think a great attribution to these futuristic cities, would be vertical farms. Vertical farms are indoor growing facilities that have multiple trays of plants and produce, growing vertically on shelves. This consumes less land, fresher and local produce, cutting down on the transportation of these foods. As these could be grown in the heart of the city. These are regularly misted, opposed to using huge amount of water sprinklers. These farms would be extremely beneficial to the environment.

Cities should be better mixed-in/organized. Communities used to be a lot smaller, but with farms and things you can have a lot of people in one place, however, this causes a need for a lot of energy in a small amount of space, which creates a need to burn fossil fuels. If everything was more mixed together, instead of having lots of different sections for different things, biking would be more convenient and people would probably walk and bike a lot more and cars would be less necessary. Cities should also use a mix of renewable energy. Solar panels are good but take up a lot of space, hydroelectricity is also good but has an impact on water creatures, wind also takes up a lot of space. Using them together would create more renewable energy.

I am wondering how large corporations can cut down on carbon and plastic emissions? one of my ideas is that they can start to power larger and larger portions of themselves with alternative forms of energy, such as tidal power.

Corporations can transfer to reusable products, such as cardboard and paper. In addition, they can put pressure on politicians, and donate to a Climate Change charity.

also just getting rid of things like the oil industry.

This is a great question Sam, and I agree that they should use alternative forms of energy.

Large companies and corporations can use recyclable & compostable packaging. They can also move to a more sustainable way of generating energy, such as solar panels, wind turbines, etc

This is already a great thread, but I also think companies can stop supporting politicians that are oil-friendly and support politicians that want to make change.

Hi everyone.
As far as we are concerned here in French Polynesia, redirecting our city towards a sustainable model is somehow a hard task. In fact, as an island (supported by other country, yes...) it is still hard for us and our government to change what has been our way of living for years.
And on one hand, i think it's the same problem for everyone.
That's why i think that today, the problem is not really about how to change and improve our green behaviour in order to go towards this "sustainable city model" that everyone supports, but more about how to make people's mind evolved and convince them with this new model.
Green countries such as Denmark try this new trend years ago and today, are a real model concerning this way of developing. That's why we have to keep up our efforts.

ciao sono d'accordo con te sarà difficile far coinvolgere la gente con questo nuovo modello di svilupparsi

Ciao anche io sono d’accordo penso che sviluppare una mentalità adeguato alla sostenibile e davvero difficile.
Le persone non riescono a rendersi conto della gravità in cui vive il nostro pianeta il governo deve continuare a sensibilizzare la popolazione

We have destroyed the flora by burning trees in order to built block of flat and for other project, it is a fact.
Maybe we can counterbalance by building block of flat which will include plants in a ubiquitous way in order to "replace" the trees we have burnt. We can already see that type of project in Milan, Italy. I think it is a good project which has a bright future

The world will be a better place if people don't smoke and don't change telephone each time the new model comes out

According to https://www.sustainyourstyle.org/old-en … al-impacts, the fashion industry is the second biggest polluter globally. It accounts for 10% of total carbon emissions, due to chemicals being released during the process of growing the cotton, making the clothes, and transporting the clothes. Not to mention, the amount of clothing that gets thrown away. The fashion industry also needs an excessive amount of water to grow the cotton/materials as well as produce the actual clothing. Personally, I have made an effort to cut back on fast fashion. I mostly buy second hand, and sell/donate products that I don't want. However, fast fashion companies and big corporations still play a part in my life. Some options to cut back include: Shopping at thrift stores, estate sales, or buying reused items online. Donating your clothing items to second hand stores, or selling them online. You could also upcycle/create your own clothes! In the end, no one is perfect, but I think you should try your best to shop as sustainably as you can, and realize if you need it or want it.

I think sustainable cities are a great idea to the environment. I guess it’s better use renewable energy sources like solar panels wich capture the  power of sunlight and convert it into electricity.
I have solar panels too. Another important renewable energy source is the hydroelectric energy wich transform the power of the moving water and turn it into electricity.
But the most important  thing  to a sustainable city I guess  is the recycling. In the future I hope all of us will to have an hybrid car to save the environment my dad already has it.

I think a sustainable city would have more popularized green methods of transportation and events promoting it. Bill Henry from PeakOil.net says “Vehicles are America’s biggest air quality compromisers, producing about one-third of all U.S. air pollution,” National Geographic asserts. “The smog, carbon monoxide, and other toxins emitted by vehicles are especially troubling because they leave tailpipes at street level, where humans breathe the polluted air directly into their lungs. That can make auto emissions an even more immediate health concern than toxins emitted high in the sky by industrial smokestacks.” So in a sustainable city they would want to have greener methods of transportation as vehicles cause so much air pollution. I think the city would make it easier to walk or bike to places. I also think the sustainable city would make it easier to take public transportation places as to lower air pollution from the city. Next I assume the sustainable city would have events promoting green transportation such as an event I had at my Elementary School. The even consisted of having a big poster on the yard in the morning and when we got to school we would put a sticker in column that said the type of transportation we took. It was very heavily encouraged to take green transportation to school and at least in my personal experienced it worked. The event got me educated about green methods of transportation and I tried to be as green as I could that week with my transportation. I think the city's main transportation system being green would make me want to live in the city as I want to do what's best for my planet so less species, plant and people suffer.

*Sustainable City not Sustainable Ciity

As stated by the Environmental Protection Agency, in the U.S., transportation results in 29 percent of greenhouse gas emissions. A large percentage of those emissions are from the types of cars that most of us drive every single day. The Environmental Protection Agency states that an average American driving a gas-fueled car emits about 4.6 metric tons of carbon dioxide every single year. There are many ways to make sure that you are lower than that average. You can buy an electric car that completely eliminates your CO2 emissions and also it saves you money, start taking public transportation, carpool with friends, or even just driving more efficiently. Because I have to drive long distances for my sport, surfing, my carbon emissions from transportation are very high. To counteract these high emissions, I usually carpool with at least one of my friends so that we emit half of the carbon as we would have if we had driven separately.

sustaineble cities
could be a great idea make a city a green and zero carbon footprint city. this is a very good example of think big and apply these toughts in real life. at this time it probabily looks like only a dream, but world needs people that believe in these crazy changes and i'm one of them. in a near future i believe that will be a big city where you will be only able to move by riding your bike or taking one of its electrics buses, we have only to put some effort on it and all could be possible for sure.

In many cities all over the world, clean walks are being organised

What is a clean walk?
It's a walk, usually in cities, where you clean up the city by picking up the rubbish in the street and throwing it in the bins (of course), sorting it, recycling it. You can do it alone, with your frinds, with your family, with friends of your friends, with your neighbours, or with people who want to do it meet through a call on social networks.

Moreover the good thing is that you don't need to be the president or an important person to organise a clean walk.
There are many sites on the internet where you can participate in a clean walk in your city with other people.

What are the benefits of a clean walk?
_It helps to clean a city
_You act and raise awareness of the people around you, or on the social networks
_You have a good time
_You're doing sport and saving the planet in the same time
_You meet new people who you might never have met if you hadn't done a clean walk
_You discover new mindset/opinion.
_And there are so many other benefits!

Become a clean walker!!

Some other benefits to picking up trash is that you can save wildlife from trash due to wildlife accidentally eating the trash. It also keeps the habitats not just us, but for other species around the world cleaner.

Reusable products such as metal straws, reusable cotton pads, and reusable containers are a great way to cut down on waste to help the environment.

yes i agree with this. another thing we can do is to try and have more electric cars being used. something that could help with that is having more places to charge them.

I agree that EVs can definitely be part of a climate change solution, however, we need to be careful of declaring that “electric cars are green,” because EVs aren't necessarily green. We need to take into account how they are made, asking, for example, where are the materials coming from? Are they being mined? How are they transported to factories? When they are put together, is the energy being used made by burning fossil fuels, or is it renewable, clean, or green energy? Then, how does the car make its way from the factory to the consumer? When you charge the car, is THAT energy green? Is the use of the EV enough to make up for all the carbon emissions and the environmental impact produced by making and transporting that EV? There are many factors that must be taken into account before we draw conclusions, which is why we cannot simply say EVs are greener or produce less carbon emissions than typical gasoline or hybrid cars. Convincing people to switch to EVs also has its difficulties, as they are often more expensive to buy and less convenient, as there are many more gas stations than there are EV charging stations.
https://www.terrapass.com/blog/whats-th … ean-energy

I think a very productive way to reduce carbon emission is through cities, and through the government. One thing I think would help is making sustainable and renewable energy more common and widespread. If it's the norm to run on sustainable energy, then it won't be expensive and will be used by the majority of people, instead of only those who can afford the extra price.
On my carbon footprint, the most impactful section was the transportation section, and I think that that's also the case for many people in my area. Therefore I think that another way to reduce carbon emissions in the city is through public transport. If the government put more funds into the public transport system, then more people would take it. Then they could focus on running public transport on clean energy. For example, AC transit from the Bay Area is taking steps to be more sustainable. "To reduce our dependence on diesel, we continue to develop hybrid buses and zero-emission fuel cell technology." (AC Transit)
Lastly, another way to reduce emissions is waste. Laura Newcomer gave many strategies on how to personally reduce waste, like buying things in bulk or buying less in general. (Newcomer) On behalf of the government, if things are sold in less packaging, and if there are more places where people can buy things in bulk, that would greatly help reduce waste in the city. 

https://www.actransit.org/website/uploa … ity_09.pdf
https://greatist.com/live/reduced-packa … daily-life

In France, and more particularly in the Pays de la Loire region, a project was launched in 2015, but the effectiveness of the project is less than the ambition to plant a tree for every birth in the Pays de la Loire region.

Now the communes have a real objective, which we can see growing! As soon as a birth is planned, a tree is planted in the communes of the Pays de la Loire region. This investment allows us to save our ecosystem and above all our planet which has been suffering from forest fires for years...

The project "One birth, one tree planted" would therefore be a precious support to raise awareness and mobilize our population. This is why the "One birth, one tree" operation was born. Each baby in the Loire region = 40,000 births per year in the Pays de la Loire will be able to become the godfather of a tree which is a symbol of life and growth.

Thus the region is committing the municipalities and public establishments
of inter-municipal cooperation (EPCI) in a virtuous dynamic.
With 1,238 municipalities and 69 EPCIs, the Pays de la Loire region
and the first to offer a subsidy for planting trees.
It will be able to see an increase in the planting of trees in its region,
by about 40,000 per year. This is wonderful for our planet!

Some municipalities and associations in France have already been participating in this programme for a long time, but on their own scale, and without subsidies... With the help of the region, planting a tree does not incur any other costs. If others are doing it without subsidies, why not you with?

In France, about 2.5 new trees are planted every second, that is 80 million new trees per year. With about 760,000 births per year in France that would be almost 1 million more trees planted which is huge! Share this movement and this objective so that other regions try to implement this project for our future and our ecological transition.

I think the community should use more electric-powered vehicles. This will help the Earth by lower greenhouse gas emissions. Many companies that produce cars have already started making hybrid or fully electric cars that are affordable. Electric cars are also cheaper because electricity is much cheaper than gas, especially in California. Collectively, cars and trucks account for nearly one-fifth of all US emissions and electric cars emit much less or almost no carbon. Using electric cars will help the planet greatly.

Where I live everybody has a green compost bin along with trash and recycling. I noticed that composting significantly lowered my carbon footprint. This is something that is easy to do and takes no extra effort for my family because my city provides us with the resources to compost. My family that lives out of state does not compost because their city does not collect it. This is bad for the environment and for our health. In 2015, Americans landfilled or incinerated around 50 million tons of compostable waste. I think every city should make composting just like trash or recycling.

I agree because the amount of waste that goes into the trash is too much and it should be reduced. I think that every city should have compost because it will help the environment. In my city, we have a compost that comes to pick it up every week, and I think it is very helpful because it can separate the trash from the landfill and also we can reuse the landfill to help our environment. The compost can also feed your animals like. If you have chickens like I do, it is very helpful, so then you are not wasteful.

There are many things a city can do such as go completely solar or use wind turbines, lessen or completely stopping use of gas powered cars, stoves, heating/cooling systems, etc. They can create parks and plant trees which would be good for the environment and for entertainment. These are only a few ways and there are still new technology like carbon capture which Elon Musk just invested $100 million into that can lessen our carbon footprint.
Link for Info About Carbon Capture and Elon's investment: https://www.nbcnews.com/science/environ … t-n1257084

If we as a society became less focused with material belonging and focused on making necessary products sustainable we could waste a lot less labor and plastic materiel.

Although the authorities are taking action, we should still strive harder in order to support and actually make this cause happen. We should take more responsibility of our surroundings and our behaviors. E.g. the 3Rs.

Might be off topic, but still on the idea of consumerism.

I recently saw someone say, "There are men making money off of my insecurities...[societal beauty standards] make us think that there is something inherently wrong with the way we are, and the way we look, so companies can present a "solution"... So you are forever spending money on something that was never broken."

That thought made me quite frustrated because not only are they making money on insecurities that they have assigned us, but they are also polluting our planet throughout this process. The amount of energy and fuel it takes to run machines, make the product, package it, ship it, for it to then be thrown away again is so unnecessary. Plastic especially makes me frusterated since it can't be safely returned back to the earth.

Does anyone know a good website, brand, or store that might make everyday items or skincare products with less packaging, sustainably, or just better than everywhere else?

Feel free to share what items you use and throw away most and see if others might have a solution for you!

It's really useful post, thanks for sharing your information... contact us
city:Bogra
zip code: 5801
country; Bangladesh
Email : latestdatabase com@gmail com
website: latestdatabase com
WhatsApp phone: +8801758300772
Contact Phone Number: +8801723283638
skype: lija.akter ( seo exparte team)
Address: Majira bypass , sajahanpur

I concur. Young people are especially obsessed of owning clothing that is made my fancy brands. They want to fit in so desperately that they just mimic everyone else and buy the same brands in stead of shopping in thrift shops and buying used clothes.

Honestly, it's sad to see that this is the reality we now live in. As someone who enjoys thrifting for clothes, I can say there are a great deal  items of clothing that are of great quality. Not only is thrifting more affordable, but there is a lot more variety than buying from a trendy brand that will soon loose popularity in a few years. Although it's great to see advancements in fashion, I don't encourage people dressing how other people dress, because you just want to be accepted in society. I believe that fashion is a way for people to express themselves by the way they present themselves. I hope that  more people will learn to find the courage to be themselves, even if they stand out.

yes, I think you are absolutely right! Everone should start  with small steps and small steps can make a difference.
Emma

local grocery stores should make their product's containers reusable or compostable rather than one time use plastic

I totally agree with the idea of reusable containers and products because one-use plastic is very wasteful and bad for the environment. I also think that we could use more paper based items because they decompose and are great for the environment and lowering our carbon footprint.

Very good points and I totally agree with your ideas. I always try to use reusable containers and try to encourage others to do so aswell.

good point sigurdur

To reduce our carbon footprint a great idea would be to make cities and places more natural and green. Eliminate factory productions, plant more trees and plants, as well as grow more healthy and sustainable vegetables and fruits.

I think there would be better ways to really stop this current issue. Stopping factory production would be too unrealistic. Maybe ways such as contacting organizations/association to support an NGO to help regional areas that are suffering damage form climate change. Or make an event of planting trees. Taking action is harder than ppl ought to think.

ECO GREEN SUPPORT___

It wouldn't work because it would create more carbon footprint to destroy current infastructure

Los patinetes eléctricos son una forma asequible de moverse por la ciudad. Si necesita comprar un scooter eléctrico con un presupuesto ajustado, su principal preocupación debe ser la calidad de la construcción de vehículos.

Después de todo, los patinetes eléctricos baratos ,generalmente, se fabrican por compañías chinas que no son conocidas por su calidad de producción. Para ayudarlo a localizar el mejor monopatín eléctrico barato, hemos compilado una lista de nuestros patines eléctricos favoritos de gama baja en el rango de precios asequibles.

Creemos que los scooters eléctricos que cuestan menos de 300 euros son el mejor lugar para comenzar a buscar. La razón es que generalmente se hacen de materiales de alta calidad y vienen con una garantía. La mayoría de las marcas ofrecen paquetes de scooter que incluyen piezas, un kit de reparación, un cargador de batería y un equipo protector.

Pensamos que dos libras son demasiado ligeras para un motor eléctrico para un scooter. Muchos patinetes eléctricos baratos pesan entre tres y cinco libras, pero son demasiado pesadas y lentas para un consumidor que necesita montar rápido y maniobra de manera segura. Para una conducción rápida, recomendamos entre siete y diez libras.

También recomendamos que los scooters baratos estén equipados con potentes motores que puedan acelerar entre siete y nueve millas por hora. Aunque muchos modelos más baratos pueden alcanzar estas velocidades, a menudo no son lo suficientemente poderosas para que la experiencia sea divertida para el jinete.

Muchos scooters eléctricos vienen con una batería que debe reemplazarse después de varios años. Siempre es prudente reemplazar su propia batería para que no tenga que pagarle a un minorista.
Algunos modelos más baratos tienen una garantía de un año, mientras que otros vienen con garantías más largas que cubren todo, desde el daño de la colisión hasta el reemplazo de la batería. Sin embargo, más corta la garantía, menos dinero es probable que pueda ahorrar.

Los patinetes eléctricos económicos generalmente vienen con partes que pueden reemplazarse fácilmente, pero debe tener cuidado al manejarlas. Algunos scooters eléctricos baratos tienen tornillos peligrosos que pueden perforar fácilmente una piel de personas.
Algunos de estos tornillos tienen productos químicos mortales en sus componentes que pueden causar quemaduras graves. Para evitar esto, busque scooters que se realicen por compañías de alta calidad que usen componentes de alto grado.

Los patines eléctricos más baratos generalmente tienen motores de calidad inferiores que no duraron mucho. Es importante que preste atención a la edad de los motores. Los modelos baratos generalmente tienen motores de países extranjeros que están sobre-diseñados y no usan piezas de calidad.
Si desea un motor eléctrico barato, busque una marca italiana o una marca estadounidense que use motores de estado sólido.

Los scooters eléctricos baratos a menudo tienen caballos de fuerza bajos. Están diseñados para ir rápido, pero no siempre le proporcionan el tipo de velocidad que usted esperaría de un vehículo de su tamaño.
Un motor eléctrico barato no podrá proporcionarle el viaje suave y seguro que necesita. En su lugar, puede intentar acelerar demasiado rápido y terminar de perder el control. Si planea gastar mucho dinero en su compra, también puede ir con un modelo caro pero confiable.

Los scooters eléctricos baratos pueden ser una buena opción si está buscando algo económico para usar como segundo vehículo. En general, son seguros de usar, tienen una velocidad decente y son fáciles de mantener.

Por otro lado, los modelos baratos de scooters de motor eléctricos no suelen proporcionar el tipo de calidad que esperan de un vehículo de su precio. Si desea algo confiable y cómodo, debe invertir en uno de los modelos más caros de scooters de motor eléctricos.

Sin duda los patinetes eléctricos se han convertido en una solución límpia para la movilidad urbana. Cada vez es más fácil encontrar coches eléctricos en Albacete produces, donde yo vivo y seguramente en pocos años todos los vehículos utilizarán energías renovables.

As it might seem clear, all the transports in the city should be sustainable and eco friendly. The solution to reduce CO2 emissions is through the use of the bicycle and public transport. In fact, the metro, train and tram are the least polluting, since their carbon footprint is only 109.5 kilos of CO2 per year.
For those private companies generating a high / medium carbon print there should be a regulation in order to calculate it, in order to offset carbon footprint. For example, at the tours company https://www.click-mallorca.com/en/ they are developing a test to calculate the carbon foot print, and to offset it by planting trees in rural areas of the municipality.

Cools roofs can be an easy solution to reduce the amount of energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions for heating and cooling a building. A cool roof reflects almost 90% of the rays coming from the sun back into space. This reduces the overall temperature of the roof, and also leads to a cooler building.

I think one way our city could become more sustainable is through rethinking our farming methods. We have learned the most emissions come from animal agriculture. Which is not beneficial to the planet nor humans. In lots of cities there are food deserts. Thousands of citizens are unable to acquire nutritious food due to stigma around healthy eating, as well of the lack of resources. If our city were to implement urban planning in neighborhoods where food deserts are prominent more people will be fed, involved in their communities, and there will be a decrease in emissions.

I understand your reasoning that agriculture does lead to and produce a lot of carbon emissions, yet when you say “rethinking our farming methods,” you do not provide any examples of how to rethink them. If there was some simple way to just rethink farming and make it suddenly low emission, I think it would have been done already. One way I can think of that we might lower emission from farms is to spread farms out across the country more efficiently, which would reduce shipping emissions. I think instead of just saying we need to rethink farming, I think that providing specific examples or methods we could use to actually make it happen.

I think sustainable cities is a great idea. I’ve recently been studying green roofs for English and I think that it is a great way to help our cities become more environmentally friendly. Green roofs would be super helpful not only for helping to reduce the carbon emissions because the plants will take in some of the carbon, but also it helps keep the bundling cooler. This could reduce the amount of air conditioning which helps to. It is also a garden so you can actually grow some types of foods so you don’t have to buy them.

Cities require immense amounts of power, and a sustainable city must draw all of this power from clean energy sources. Nuclear power could be a good option for the future. It has some definite pros and very negative cons. Nuclear power would be very expensive to establish. The plant and the workers there would all require a lot of money. For operating, the facility would require top of the line scientists and physicists. They would have to be paid by large salaries. Uranium, the most common fuel for these power plants, costs $15,000,000 per kg. However one gram can produce 24,000,000 million kWh of electricity (24 gWh). This amount of electricity is worth around $3,560,000, meaning the fuel is more expensive than the energy output. Even still, this amount of can power over 2,250 homes. Comparing to wind turbines, where a 1,000 KW (1 MW) turbine costs around $2,000,000. That means 1 kg of u-235 produces as much energy as 24,000 wind turbines, which would cost $48,000,000,000. Even though nuclear power is incredibly expensive, it is still much cheaper than its energy equivalent in wind turbines. There is also the problem of the radioactive waste. It is difficult and expensive to despose of and has numerous negative effects if not dealt with properly. Incorrectly disposed-of waste can have very detrimental effects on the environment and any surrounding population.

Is nuclear power a good option? There are clearly some serious downsides, but also some considerable benefits. It could still be an option for the future of clean energy.

I agree with you, but I think that you have your conclusion mixed up. 4,000,000 people die each year from pollution associated with the generation of power through fossil fuels, while a fraction of those deaths would occur if all of the power in the world was generated through nuclear power. I don’t think that nuclear power would be a sustainable energy production method in the future however, because of the toxic waste that is a byproduct of nuclear power. I think that it would be a great way to move away from fossil fuels until we can implement the necessary green energy infrastructure because as you said, we are going to need a whole lot of wind turbines and solar panels, but we wouldn’t need that many nuclear power plants.Another thing I didn’t agree with is that you said nuclear power isn’t profitable. You said that uranium costs $15,000,000 per kg, and that one gram produces $3.56 million dollars worth of power, but it seems like you failed to notice that there are 1000 grams in a kilogram. Anyways, I agree with you, just not entirely.

It is definitely a step in the right direction, but I feel the final solution hasn’t even been discovered yet.

I would paint the roads white because this raises the albedo of the roads. By having a higher albedo, the temperature of the city would be cooler. Los Angeles is already doing this, having started in 2017, which will hopefully lower the temperature of the city by 3 degrees in 20 years. https://www.popsci.com/la-is-painting-i … city-cool/. My city would also have parking garages, so there is less roadside parking. Without the need for roadside parking, the roads can be narrower. This means that there is more space for trees and grass, which both have a higher albedo than asphalt or concrete.

I agree on painting roads white, as well as painting the roofs of buildings white. This would be great for decreasing the temperature in our cities, as well as having parking garages available for public use. Having more room for grass and trees in cities would help raise the albedo but also would reduce carbon emissions.

Urban centers can become extremely polluted when there are large amounts of carbon-emitting vehicles around. Therefore, the first action I would take is to develop a good public transport system (a subway, bus system, or tram) that would cover the same area. If personal vehicles are necessary for a person, then licenses would be available. However, due to the vast suburbs surrounding most cities, it would also be necessary to construct subway stations that also connect to the wider network. Personal vehicles would be allowed here, but a “carbon tax” would result in most people barely driving except in certain situations or using electrical cars. This system would overall allow for better air quality and much less noise pollution. A connected system of parks and bike trails would add another layer, which would also negate carbon while creating a happier, healthier place to live.

A lot of people dont bring cars to the city because they are only a few block’s walk from a subway anyway. Are you saying that “carbon tax” would make people pay for the use of a car? Because i like that idea

Public transportation is commonplace in today's society.  go to any city in the world and you can find buses and trains going everywhere.  But what people don't pay attention to is the effect this has on the environment.  According to epa.gov, public transportation is responsible for 30 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, making it the largest contributor in the United States. if people would take alternate forms of transportation such as biking, walking or carpooling, we would significantly reduce our carbon footprint, making a cleaner and healthier earth.

I agree with what you are saying about how transportation effects our atmosphere and environment. I believe that transportation as a whole is okay where it's at. If someone has to go say 15 miles from point A to point B it becomes very inefficient, but with our day in age we are slowly moving towards a cleaner and more sustainable source of transportation. If we can get the same amount of "efficiency" as a car without the labor of a bike we can kill two birds with one stone. That's where electric vehicles come in, but again not all people have access to purchase these types of vehicles. I can agree with all of your stated methods like biking, walking, or carpooling but they all have their own use and place.

I didn't know that public transportation caused so much pollution in our environment. In my city I have noticed advancements in the pollution public transportation causes. I have seen multiple buses that are more 'eco-friendly'. Actually, in 2015 in San Fransisco CA they introduced 37 more eco-friendly and reliable public buses to the city. Part of what makes the buses more eco-friendly than others is they are made partially from recycled materials like glass and metals. Also, sections of the buses are made from biodegradable materials that can naturally decompose. My sources are cited below.

https://homeguides.sfgate.com/ecofriend … 78718.html

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/3 … er/113240/

Personally, I don't agree at all. I do doubt that public transportation is responsible for more emissions than cars and planes combined. Though a bus basically emits as much as a car, it's how many people use them that reduces the emissions, it's almost like carpooling but with more people in a bigger car. If 20 people commute on a bus, that's like taking 20 cars off the road which is a huge deal if there are tens of millions using public transit (which there are). In addition, there are not only buses but subways and railways for longer commutes that are still so much more efficient and greener than cars. I'm not saying your opinion is wrong though, I agree that biking or walking is much better, but for many, transportation is their only option besides by car which is expensive and horrible for the environment.

Mass transport is definitely the way to go for large cities. Many American cities suffer from lots of pollution and smog from all the cars and trucks on the road. The culture of buying bigger and bigger SUVs and trucks also leads to more fuel inefficient vehicles on the road. By allowing people access to cheap (or ideally free) mass transit options that can carry them where ever they need to go within the city, carbon emissions can easily be cut down. Also, by having government controlled subways and buses, switching to electric options could be more easily implemented and would not rely on every citizen to switch to a more sustainable electric vehicle. Cities like Mexico City have greatly benefited from large subway systems, and their pollution from cars has dropped significantly. When in Mexico City, a subway will take you within walking distance of nearly everywhere in the city, which largely eliminates the need for a car from someone that lives there.

Mass transportation is certainly better for the environment than cars, and biking and walking better still. In cities, mass transportation is very effective, the layout and population density makes it much easier than driving. Biking and walking is even more beneficial for the environment. However, biking and walking are simply not as time efficient. City streets are crowded and may make it difficult to get anywhere safely. Also, in colder months, it would be a pain to walk or bike in snow. Depending on the city, public transportation, while having a large carbon footprint, still might be an overall better method.

I believe that one of the biggest issues with countries' fight with climate change today is the willingness of their people to do their part. Many governments see switching to more sustainable ways of living as expensive, and not directly benefiting them. If only a few countries make the switch, it won't make a big enough difference in the climate  anyway. And, unless the government is like the Chinese government or something similar where the people have more restricted personal freedoms, rolling out new environmentally friendly methods would be difficult. For example, if the United States government decided that all vehicles had to be electric or hybrid by 2030, there would be massive public outcry. People like to have the freedom to choose their own vehicle, and government intervention would not be taken well at all. But that isn't to say that total control over the country would lead to more sustainable solutions. For example, there are many companies and people living in the US that are very sustainable, or are doing as much as is feasible to reduce their footprints, while a more controlling government might prioritize production and profits over more sustainable methods in businesses. Soon the governments of the world are going to have to decide what to do, and what measures need to be taken in order to impose climate friendly regulations in each of their countries. We will have to see which system works the best, or if there needs to combination of the two different ways of governing.

This is an excellent point. I believe that the best way to slow climate change in the U.S is to use the carrot and the stick. Firstly, the government will cheapen electric cars while also building in charging stations for these electric cars in every town. After this change, the government raises taxes on fossil fuels ever so slightly, which will result in the electric car being cheaper to get and use than its predecessor. Now, new drivers would logically want the electric cars, and so the companies making cars would move swiftly to supply the demand. Cars running on natural gas would become something “old fashioned” or “loud and obnoxious” so social pressure will also provide a incentive to get electric cars. Now boom. Everyone uses electric cars within a decade or two. This method of using a reward to move people in a certain direction while indirectly punishing people for not can work in any situation, and mutes any public outcry. After all, who would complain when a cheaper, easier, and overall better system overtakes a worse one?

By 2050 over 70% of people will live in Urban areas. Over 2/3 of the worlds carbon emissions come from these cities with the number only going up each year. The main goal is to create more renewable energy and less dirty energy, if we want to create true sustainability. Cities like Copenhagen Denmark are way ahead of most cities, with over 5 times the amount of bikes as cars. The idea of a sustainable city is going to require the cities to focus on the pedestrians, and not building around cars or dirty energy. In New York City where over 20 million people reside, the streets are jam packed with cars daily, and not friendly to pedestrians. Cities must be built around the people, and encourage people to use public transportation or bike/walk, instead of cars which produce mass amounts of dirty energy.

First of all at we should all be aware of what’s really happening outside our personal space. In fact we’re not alone in this planet and we must take into consideration that being selfish will only cause our lost. Of course we obviously can’t stop everything and crash the economy by eating plants and seeds everyday; but we should be able to change little by little our life style. In other words, I think that the ideal of a sustainable economy isn’t out of reach for us. If we want to apply it really hard and if we find the right balance between consumption and the respect of the environment. We are used to consume without thinking about the consequences of our actions. In conclusion we should for example, choose handmade bags over plastic bags; walk more, eat less meat , Not waste energy.

I agree that it would be best to change our lifestyles little by little (unless it is easy to make the change quickly). I think one of the important things to encouraging everyone to do so would be to spread awareness more. While some people or countries might be more environmentally conscious, others could probably benefit from a campaign or something to educate them more. However that also brings up the fact that it is not always the cheapest to switch to living more sustainably. For countries that aren't as well off or are still developing, it could be harder for them to do as much. That being said, then I think it comes down to the more well-off countries being willing to help them out more.

My ideal sustainable city would be a neat and organized civilization, which the #1 goal is to reduce their carbon footprint. Since people litter, I would organize a city-wide clean-up, which everyone must participate in once a week. In every house there would be a water, electricity, and beef limit. This will keep everyone’s carbon footprint low.

i mean thats a great idea but some people may not want to do that and have some fit over that but on the other hand it would help the world a lot i already try to reduce how much hot water i use and make sure that we dont always use electricity

I definitely agree, citizens should actively try to reduce their carbon footprint. However, I don't think forcing it would be helpful in reducing carbon emissions, as it would demotivate citizens from doing something to help on their own. Regardless, I think it's a great idea!

I agree, we should definitely try to lower the Carbon footprint because our environment would be so much better.

The City would have many community gardens, as well there would be trees and compost bins to throw your leftover food in. Solar panels would be promoted over lights, and biking and walking would be encouraged. Also there would be electrical cars and charging ports for them everywhere.

This is a really good idea on how to create a sustainable and healthy city.

I think that this is a very good idea because I always notice when I go into cities that there is a lot of trash and litter on the street.  Also, I think that it would be beneficial to have a limit on water because then less would be used and wasted.

I believe this is a good idea, but an idea that has many flaws. Many people will not attend the weekly cleanup and will make excuses not to consistently. I liked the idea of the in-home limits, but these limits would have to be very high because some households need a certain amount of electricity, beef, and water.

I think that this would be very helpful, and along with other regulations carbon footprints could be massively reduced for a city. Unfortunately, unless the city's government has near complete control over its citizens, or at least has a lot of influence over what they can and cannot do, it wouldn't be successful. Especially in America, many people value their personal freedoms, and don't appreciate government intervention. This is good from a personal standpoint, as we can largely do what we like as long as it isn't illegal. But, I seriously doubt how effective meat regulations, and mandatory city-wide cleanups would be. It only takes a small percentage of people to ignore or not meet regulations to cause issues for the whole city. If there could be a way to control for this, then I think this idea would be very helpful in combating climate change.

Here's your chance not just to be the mayor, but the original city planner as well! Imagine a medium sized city that would be developed with modern, low carbon transportation in mind, and other strategies to reduce the average citizens' carbon footprints.
What would that city look like? Would that make you more likely to want to live there?

If I were to recreate my own city I will absolutely make sure the city is 90% sustainable. You would wonder why 90% and not 100%, well if I can make it 100% sustainable that would be amazing but there are times we don't have a choice or even forgets. In my medium sized city car would be illegal, so you would use the bus, walk, bike, or run. You would think, so we can't go on car trips or go on planes, well yes you can, that's the reason I said it would only be 90%. Sometimes you just need to give yourself a break. Now you ask, how about our homes there must be lots we can't do, well I'm not that mean. When your home there will be solar panels on every house so the electricity would come from there but of course there will be emergency electricity boxes at home when you really need it. That is a simple tour of my medium-sized city, but there is a lot more! Feel free to add on to my sustainable city. Some examples can be.....
- when your shopping what do you use to replace plastic bags
-During a menstrual cycle, what can you use that is more sustainable
-etc.

My idea of medium-sized city is a place which gathers culture, sustainable development and modernity. Imagine your city with less noises, less smell of car's exhaust pipe and your culture in perfect harmony with news technologies and the environment.
I live in a tropical country, Tahiti, located in French Polynesia at 8 hours by plane of USA. My country is known to it nature, it landscapes, and it islands all around. Our culture is very close by the nature, we use the nature to feed the population, to build our homes, to get dressed but also to be keep in touch with her.
Due to our location, we detect less effects of capitalism, but we are in danger with the rising water levels and the global warming which destroy corals are severals animals of the sea.
I think that we need to use different way to reduce our footprints and to modernize healthily our country with the development of means of transports, protect and control the marine ressources against some industries ( domains of fish, pearls, etc…). Furthermore, we need to develop our financial system to promote the sustainable activities against the carbonate activities.
In the domain of tourism, we have an hotel which operate with the energy given by the nature.
Indeed, we have to develop the green tourism, eco-responsible gestures and sustainable development.

I agree with MrGlobalWarming987 on the first part of his argument ( his ideal city would be great ) .
However, living in French Polynesia too , i disagree on the effects of capitalism. I think that we do feel the capitalist society . People in Tahiti mostly buy more than they need . I feel like their relationship with mother nature isn't quite the same as before as we witness trash on the beach or on the side of the road.
But I hope that it will turnover and that people are going to wake up.

I also totally agree with Situ.M on his ideal sustainable town . We can't live yet with a 100% sustainable city.

I agree with the sentiment of this sustainable city. The ideas of 90% sustainability and the use of solar panels in everyone's home is an interesting concept. However even though it is only a hypothetical I feel like achieving this city would not happen as there are too many assumptions made on people's preference or own ideas. For example I find it hard to believe that people would willingly give up all of these types of transportation without an even more accessible alternative.

I agree that to start curving the emissions humans put into the atmosphere, we need to change how we create energy. I also agree with Tanuj Jujaray's argument that people will not willingly give up an abundant method of transportation for something that is way more expensive. Maybe to combat this, we could invent a magnetically levitating and electric skytrain, or maybe a buss that has solar panels on its roof, maybe even more abundant electric or hybrid cars for affordable prices. There are many possibilities to solve this problem, but we actually have to do them rather then just say that we will.

Honestly all cities have problems and that could be what people are doing to the environment. Support Farmers and buy more produce, Meats, Vegetables. Stuff from the earth instead of food being thrown out make our world healthier and happier and if you don't like something anymore give it to someone else who will use it.

Yes, I agree that all cities have problems and that we should support farmers, specifically local farmers, but I don't agree that we should support the meat industry as much. Cows are a large part of climate change since they release so much methane, and many habitats are destroyed to make homes for them. Methane is a lot worse for the climate than CO2. Giving old things to people who could need them rather than fully throwing them into the landfill is something that I think everyone should start doing and normalize since there has been a massive increase in low-income families and people living on the streets.

I agree that we should support local farmers and try not to consume as much meat. Additionally, I think we should also do our best to lessen food waste by using all our food before buying anything new, or buying what is need to use the remainder of our food. In America, food waste is estimated to be 30-40% of the food supply. By lessening our food waste we lessen our effect on the earth because carbon is emitted from transporting food and tons of water is used to grow them. After watching the documentary Cowspiracy, I learned that 2,500 gallons of water are used to produce 1 pound of beef.

I think it is a great idea. Many governments are unwilling to move to a more sustainable way of living because it might mean less profits are going to certain industries such as the meat industry, that contributes a lot towards the increasing amount of carbon and methane in our atmosphere. Giving away your old belongings and reusing things also keeps things out of our landfill, which is essentially a huge pit of pollution and waste. Althea and Chloe also make great points about how the meat industry and food waste affect our ecosystems.

SuStAiNaBle city :cool

very good

facts

My sustainable city would have recycling and trash cans in every store.The cans would also be visible in the stores so that there will be no reason to litter. There would also be a weekly pick up day where everyone would go out and clean up their street. This way there would be less litter in the city but it wouldn't be a hard task to manage.We would also raise money to efford everyone an electric car. This way over time more people will be able to have an electric car and the pollution will reduce.I believe that people will want to move here because over time people with be able to get a car they can feel great about because it will help the environment.ALso all the task are simple,effective ways that will help the Earth.

City sustainability is good, in a city, green energy alternatives are great, electric cars and busses can attract new residents and business.

In an ideal sustainable city, there would be limited waste of essential or unessential materials. For example, a sustainable city would limit electricity use in a way to conserve energy. The city would also limit water usage to save water so the city would not go into a drought. The city would limit the use of plastic. If cities provided less plastic and more reusable products, there would be less pollution. In this sustainable city, most power would come from the sun meaning every house and building has solar panels on them.

Bremerton is a great city to live in. People are really nice as long as you do your thing. Schools are great and eatery is good to

I think it could be helpful if pricing was based off of carbon footprint (lower impact=lower price). This would encourage consumers to be more conscious of how much pollution is caused by the products they use, as well as providing an incentive to go for the product that has a lower carbon footprint, improving their own. Items with a lower carbon footprint would become more popular, thus manufacturers invest in safer practices. Each company would have to fill out a form (similar to the one on this site) to find the carbon footprint both for general practices and for each product. There would then be price guidelines based on carbon footprint, cost to make and how essential it is. Companies who are following the guidelines on yearly checkups get bonuses.

Some things that could be implemented in order to promote a more sustainable city include solar powered homes, accessible public transport to reduce carbon emissions from personal transportation, more open spaces, and more room for cyclists and skateboarders to promote transportation that doesn't release carbon emissions.

There are many simple things to improve cities worldwide, some of these include: renewable sidewalks, sturdiar infrastructure, cleaner energy production such as city-wide solar, along with person-to-person things, such as using less water and eating sustainable foods.

To make my city as sustainable as possible, I would want to promote good choices by creating good laws, but also make these laws maintainable so that people actually follow them. To start off, I would want to ban non-electric cars. This would immediately help lower our carbon footprint. In addition, I would offer low-priced public transit to promote the use of it. I would also offer free supplies for composting and “reward” people who compost to as an incentive for helping reduce our cities carbon footprint. For sourcing our groceries and essentials, I would find an ethical, low impact way to bring them to our city. I would be sure to appoint a leader in our city to  ensure that we do everything we can to reduce our carbon footprint.  Cities like these will ensure our future, which I think is enough reason to want to live in a sustainable city like the one in my head.

Investing in a more fuel efficient car. I think this is a good investment beacuse it has a good impact on the environment. I helps to not burn as many fossil fuels and helps with pollution. Also making your car more fuel efficient you could use the amount of oil that is reccomended by government. So saving trips that aren’t necesary or using more public transportation saving the amount of fossil fuels being burnt.

I think that the ideal city would grow all of their crops and would have some type of system that would make sure that all of its residents recycle their plastics and biodegradable. This city would also have lots of trees planted in various parts of it. For a power source, something green and renewable.

The City would have many gardens and trees and plants, as well and solar panels, wind turbines and would promote electric cars and biking/walking to places around the city.

An ideal sustainable city would have to have many factors. First off, fossil fuels have to come to an end for the city to be sustainable. This would impact many things including means of transportation, construction/road work, daily household items like the air conditioner or heater, and refineries/factories. Another change would be sustainable farming and food supplies. Because agriculture is mainly seasonal I would recommend an “indoor farm” where we can simulate the conditions needed for higher demand foods as well as increase the space because we could expand vertically. A third change would be and a very important change would include sustainable energy. As I covered earlier we need to get rid of fossil fuels and other harmful ways to acquire energy. Some new ways that would be widespread throughout all of the community would be 1. Solar energy; solar energy is an amazing and simple way to get electricity from the sun without harming the environment. 2. Wind turbines; wind turbines are also a very nice and simple way to acquire energy by using wind to spin and create electricity. 3. Hydroelectric power; Hydroelectric power is the same concept as a wind turbine where instead, the water pushes the blades instead of wind. These are the cheapest and some of the most sustainable ways for humans to harness energy and use it for themselves.

what would my sustainable city look like? It would look like one that is able to retain the supply of natural resources while achieving economic, physical and social progress. Also to remain safe against environmental risks

It would look like a lot of bikes and not many gas stations which would influence people not to have gas run cars.

A lot of countries have started to make a change in the organisation of urban areas, in order to head towards sustainable way of life in the cities. Singapore for example puts into practice the concept of plant-covered architecture on the city buildings, which have at the top of their roofs some kind of farming plants. There is also the city of Detroit, Michigan (USA) which focuses on « create a high-quality, accessible, attractive, and environmentally sustainable city environment while reducing resource use and reversing negative environmental impacts ».
According to me, a lot of people are willing to make some changes in their city, such as creation of car park at borders of the city in order to favour more sustainable transports (tram line, bicycle grids, car free areas).
I think that the best way to reach a realistic sustainable city is to find the right balance between the functions of the city and the elements that make it possible to respond to contemporary issues in the fields of energy, transport, etc. To me, a city in which nature is increasingly incorporated and which seeks to put the well-being of its citizens by putting respect for the environment ahead of economic returns is a city that has the capacity to be sustainable (and quite futuristic don't you think ?).

One key aspect of a sustainable city would be having solar reflecting roofs. According to an article published by Michigan State University "Replacing 80% of conditioned roof area on commercial buildings in the U.S. with solar reflective material would offset 125 MMT CO2...equivalent to turning off 31 coal power plants."

Santiago- that's very interesting.  Is this a backup solution in case solar panels are impractical or too expensive?

wow that seems like It would really help reduce emissions if we can start installing those quickly.  But do the reflective roofs provide power in return?

I definitely agree with this statement. Solar reflecting roofs would make a huge positive impact on the climate. The one issue I see with this though is the cost of the solar panels because I believe they are quite expensive to have installed. Overall though I believe a switch to more solar roofs would be great for the environment.

Tenemos que empezar a concientizarnos sobre estos temas para así mejorar a nuestra sociedad. El cálculo de la huella de carbono fue una actividad muy interesante e innovadora.

If i were to recreate a city in a more sustainable way, many changes would need to take place, including the way people view their own impact. On the electricity topic, the only thing an average person can really control is using less water, turning off lights and switching to energy efficient house appliances. Alternatives need to be presented by governments, politicians and companies. they have full control over where our tax money goes towards. Definitely large changes in the way our energy is created and how efficiently our usage is, can greatly impact the carbon footprint in a city.

Transportation has been known to help the community get around, and saves the environment from producing more greenhouses gases. In the United States, transportation is 29% of their greenhouse gas emissions. I know that I can personally start taking more transits in my area, because it will decrease my personal carbon footprint along with some greenhouse gas emissions produced just from me driving to school. Transits decrease travel demand, and gets multiple people to get where they are going, and not just one person. Taking the bus to school gets me and 40 other people there, while taking a car wastes a minute amount of gas, but produces more emissions if I were to take a car every day over a bus.

Sources: https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations … ansit-role

In my Carbon Footprint, a large portion was taken up by transportation. I drive to and from school, different sports practices, and places on the weekends. How does this really affect our world? According to the Center for Biology, the U.S. alone, transportation makes up one third of the climate damaging emissions. In California, transportation is the number one contributor to production of greenhouse gasses. These gasses trap heat which causes a rise in global warming, affecting all humans. Also, they can we toxic at high levels. What can we do? It's simple. We can walk. I can't walk all the way to school, or practices but I can walk to places like the grocery store and to the bus stop. I walk many places that include friends houses, the store, and church. Walking is also a good source of exercise  and has many benefits  that contributed to others and yourself.

Sources:
https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/pro … index.html
https://socratic.org/questions/why-is-t … -to-humans

I agree I think walking and biking places as well as taking public transportation would help as well.  Personally I carpool to school with two other people or join a carpool with five other people on some days.  This website (shown below) also says that when flying in an airplane, flying in economy class is best because the fuel is spread over more people as opposed to flying in first-class or sections with a lesser amount of people. 
https://cotap.org/reduce-carbon-emissions/

One especially important factor in creating a sustainable city and limit carbon emissions is to clean up and advance upon transpirational systems. One way of helping the transportation system would be to encourage the use of public transportation. In a sustainable city, it is important to have busses/trains not only for convenient and low cost travel but also to help lower the amount of people driving cars, which would help to keep carbon emissions low. To increase the amount of people using public transportation, a sustainable city should figure out city hotspots and create routes that travel through those areas. One city that works out this system quite efficiently is New York City. An article by NextCity titled "Can New York’s Transit Authority Lead the Way to a Carbon-Efficient Future?" states that "Each year New York City’s public transit system keeps millions of metric tons of greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere." A sustainable city should mirror or take example from this system in forming their own systems. Personally, when I was visiting New York City, I noticed that the public transit systems were even faster than driving as the city is highly populated and many people drive. Some methods that could be used to increase foot traffic in public transportation are advertising, cleaning, and increasing the size of trains and other methods of transportation. These transpirational ideas should be taken into account when creating a sustainable city.

I think one of the key things that could be done to reduce the carbon footprint in cities is to fix the transportation system. Both by creating a larger public transportation system and a cleaner way or the public to travel around themselves. A larger public transportation system could consist of more buses and trains. These types of transportation are better for the environment because more people ride them so their emissions are divided among multiple people. I believe more people would take buses or trains if they were more convient and widespread across a city. The other way cities can lower their carbon emissions is by promoting forms of transportation that do not need gas, such as riding bicycles, scooters, or just walking. A city were they already do this very well is New York City. In New York City, many people take the subway, buses, bikes, or walk. The system in New York City is not perfect though as many people still take cars. If more people took forms of transportation that emit less carbon the transportation system in a city would be much greener.

Source: http://www.newurbanism.org/transport.html

If I was a mayor of a sustainable city, the first action I would make would be to make sure that all waste is being either deposed properly or reused. I think that a lot of the resources we throw away can be used as materials in my city. For example, pizza boxes are commonly thrown in the recycle when they have food remnants on it, making it unable to be properly recycled. In my city, all pizza boxes should be thrown in the compost so that it can be turned into fertilizer. This fertilizer will be used to grow all of our food so we won't have the cost and carbon emission of imported goods. In addition, my city would have a plastic ban. National Geographic explains that 40% of plastic production is packaging. To reduce this, all the materials and food would be made near or in our city.

If I was a mayor of a sustainable city, the first action I would make would be to make sure that all waste is being either deposed properly or reused. I think that a lot of the resources we throw away can be used as materials in my city. For example, pizza boxes are commonly thrown in the recycle when they have food remnants on it, making it unable to be properly recycled. In my city, all pizza boxes should be thrown in the compost so that it can be turned into fertilizer. This fertilizer will be used to grow all of our food so we won't have the cost and carbon emission of imported goods. In addition, my city would have a plastic ban. National Geographic explains that 40% of plastic production is packaging. To reduce this, all the materials and food would be made near or in our city.

I think that a big factor in teenage carbon footprints is transportation. Our city has a lot public transportation that is available to our community. AC transit and BART should be utilized more by teenagers today. I try my best to use these public transportation systems as often as possible, and so should all teens today. I believe that by doing so, our city and carbon footprints will benefit.

I agree transportation was a big thing in my carbon footprint. AC transit and Bart can help me a lot with that situation. It can also help our community's carbon footprint average. A lot of people decide not to go on these things because they think it's dirty or nasty. We can all help clean these two transportation systems and finally see a decrease in our carbon footprint. So take action and decrease your carbon footprint today!!

I agree with you. I think that transportation has a big affect on carbon footprints, and it is something that should be changed now. The United States Environmental Protection Agency states, "Transportation (28.9 percent of 2017 greenhouse gas emissions) – The transportation sector generates the largest share of greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions from transportation primarily come from burning fossil fuel" (EPA 1). This evidence shows how big of an impact transportation has on the greenhouse gas emissions, being the largest contributor to climate change. The fossil fuels that this quote tells us about brings out how toxic the transportation we use on a daily basis is for our planet's life. If people, especially teens, started using public transportation more, it would be very beneficial to the atmosphere.

I agree with you. people  can save more than $9,738 per year by taking public transportation instead of driving. This  can lead to  environmental benefits. If your commute is 20-miles round trip, or even more and you switch to public transportation you  could lower your carbon footprint by 4,800 pounds annually.

I agree that public transportation is a valuable resource for people in urban areas, and that it should be used more frequently by young and old people alike. I understand why you would say that people can save money by taking public transportation, but in the moment, a short car trip which will not directly result in needing to get gas can seem like the more affordable option. According to the BART fare calculator (https://www.bart.gov/tickets/calculator), an adult one way ticket from San Francisco International Airport to Oakland International airport is $17.00. A drive between those two places would have the immediate cost of $0. An obvious solution to this problem is to make public transportation free. Of course, then there is the issue of how the BART operators, AC Transit drivers, etc. would be paid. It is a complicated issue, but it could significantly bring down the area's carbon footprint.

A sustainable city would waste less water, food, and would produce less greenhouse gases. To start off, it would need to include electric cars, sustainable items with no plastic, solar panels, and more plant life. People should recycle, compost, and produce as little waste as possible. They could also take quicker showers and eat less meat to save water. As for plant life, we could gradually grow more trees and produce organic foods. I would also make sustainable items such as containers, utensils, and more available to everyone. Electric cars do not require the use of fossil fuels nor does it emit carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. These are just some general ideas, but I will mostly cover the use of electric cars. Electric cars reduce air pollution and are even better when charged with renewable energy, such as solar panels. According to energy.gov, "The U.S. used nearly nine billion barrels of petroleum last year, two-thirds of which went towards transportation.  Our reliance on petroleum makes us vulnerable to price spikes and supply disruptions." This shows a large amount of fossil fuels that are being used for transportation in just one country alone. Just imagine what it would be like for the whole world? These cars can even help contribute to the health of people by improving the air quality around them. This is why my family and I have an electric car. I think all these eco-friendly factors would me want to live in this sustainable city because a better environment would mean that there are fewer natural disasters.

Source: https://www.energy.gov/eere/electricveh … e-benefits

A sustainable city would waste less water, food, and would produce less greenhouse gases. To start off, it would need to include electric cars, sustainable items with no plastic, solar panels, and more plant life. People should recycle, compost, and produce as little waste as possible. They could also take quicker showers and eat less meat to save water. As for plant life, we could gradually grow more trees and produce organic foods. I would also make sustainable items such as containers, utensils, and more available to everyone. Electric cars do not require the use of fossil fuels nor does it emit carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. These are just some general ideas, but I will mostly cover the use of electric cars. Electric cars reduce air pollution and are even better when charged with renewable energy, such as solar panels. According to energy.gov, "The U.S. used nearly nine billion barrels of petroleum last year, two-thirds of which went towards transportation.  Our reliance on petroleum makes us vulnerable to price spikes and supply disruptions." This shows a large amount of fossil fuels that are being used for transportation in just one country alone. Just imagine what it would be like for the whole world? These cars can even help contribute to the health of people by improving the air quality around them. This is why my family and I have an electric car. I think all these eco-friendly factors would me want to live in this sustainable city because a better environment would mean that there are fewer natural disasters.

To start off, a Maglev Train System is a magnetically driven train system. This means that there are 0 carbon emissions to use the system as it is all powered by electricity and magnets. The track and the train cars have magnets that push apart at an angle that excels the train at extremely fast speeds to get around a broad landscape. As trains and cars usually use up much more gas to get up hill, these trains don't have any problem getting up hill, and when they do, nothing impacts the environment. These trains are currently used in countries like Japan, Russia, and rarely in India. They are still in an experimental status currently, but as society progressively moves towards new forms of transportation, I believe this is safe and efficient way to the future. The one downside to this idea is of production. Designing, shipping, and placement of the train tracks are all factors that in itself could strongly emit carbons. But if this idea was taken as a very long term design for our society, weighing the outcomes, the maglev is the best option as the impact on the environment once in use would be incredibly minor. In my city, Oakland, it would make for either a replacement or an addition to the bart system. If they were to restart the train project from the Bay area to L.A,  I would implement the Maglev as the trains can speed up to 300/MPH. The trains can hold and transport many people at extremely fast speeds without worrying about emitting carbons or being controlled by uncontrollable variables like the wind or sun for renewable energy. With the use of magnets, the train system can be reimagined and many people can switch over to train travel from air travel without the cost of burning the planet with any carbon footprint at all. What do you think about this idea? I know there are budget factors and many others, but in terms of the environment, what ideas could you add, change, or completely eliminate out of this idea?

For information about the train system: https://depts.washington.edu/i2sea/iscf … .php?fid=6

If I was to plan out an environmentally sustainable city I would put heavy emphasis on recycling and sustainable forms of transportation. My city would regulate recycling practices and enforce strict fees for failure to properly recycle. I would also intertwine the economy to waste management by giving tax reductions if local businesses support the ban of unnecessary packaging like plastic and styrofoam. I will create road laws that help ensure the safety and quality of biking around my city, giving my citizens the sustainable benefits of biking such as lowering greenhouse gas emissions and noise pollution. The city would be somewhat similar to San Francisco, being near the ocean and in a northern climate. I would like to live in this environmentally sustainable city.

Benefits of biking:
http://www.walkandrollpeel.ca/cycling/benefits.htm

Information on how San Francisco handles waste:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/13/how-san … ement.html

I definitely agree with everything you said. However, I would add heavy enforcement on composting. While recycling is better than putting something in a landfill, it still uses a lot of energy, water, and labor to do. Compost is a simpler way to reduce waste in landfills and is simpler. On a smaller scale, it can be done at home fairly easily and I would have it be taught at school so kids know how to do it from a young age. Additionally, I would have the city grow perishable fruits and vegetables, as well as other things, locally to eliminate all the fuel that goes into transporting them from farms that are far away. There is typically a lot of wasted space in cities such as on rooftops. I would use this space to plant gardens that local people could run as a business as a way to create more jobs as well as have some rooftop community gardens where people with a lower income could go to have access to healthy foods.

Source: https://ensia.com/notable/sustainable-cities/

Electric Cars are better for the environment since electricity is less expensive and than gasoline and releases fewer greenhouse gases. The office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Sources claims, "The U.S. used nearly nine billion barrels of petroleum last year, two-thirds of which went towards transportation...EVs help reduce...because almost all U.S. electricity is produced from domestic sources, including coal, nuclear, natural gas, and renewable sources.EVs can also reduce the emissions that contribute to climate change and smog, improving public health and reducing ecological damage. Charging your EV on renewable energy such as solar or wind minimizes these emissions even more." Evident in this information, we are able to see that Electric cars are better for the environment because they are energy efficient and help to reduce the usage of greenhouse gases in addition to being less dangerous for the health of people.. While Gasoline Powered Cars release emissions into the atmosphere, Electric Cars make an attempt to reduce emissions while carrying out the same functions as a standard car.

Yes, I agree, I think we should have public transportation electric too because that also contributes to the gasses that are released.

To start, my sustainable city would make single use products better for the earth. More specifically, getting rid of any packaging that cannot be composted or recycled. This city would look beautiful and clean, and have waste laying around everywhere. I would want to live in the sustainable city because of the cleanliness and peacefulness of knowing there is not waste everywhere you look.

Great ideas! How do you think the cleanliness of the city may motivate people to be more environmentally conscious? I would add that a good sustainable city is very multifaceted. In addition to as much recyclable or compostable materials as possible, a sustainable city would include aspects like public transport as a viable alternative to cars, new energy-efficient homes, cultural and social amenities which are accessible to all, and more renewable energy. These added facets would work to create an energy efficient, stable city.

These are both very cool, environmentally friendly ideas for what a sustainable city would contain. I would like to add another aspect of a sustainable city. This would be implementing solar panels to homes and factories across the city. This would eliminate the need for things like fossil fuels, and significantly improve the environment. According to GreenMatch, solar panels provide a renewable source of energy, that is also easy to implement and reduce electricity bills. As long as the sun is there, we will have power.

Source for Solar Panel benefits
https://www.greenmatch.co.uk/blog/2014/ … lar-energy

All of these ideas are great! Getting rid of any packaging that cannot be composted or recycled would drastically change the city for the better. Additionally, public transportation would also reduce the cities' collective carbon footprint. For example, using ten different cars for ten different people could result in a higher carbon footprint for each of these people, whereas having all 10 people use a single bus or train would be better for the environment. When I was filling out the Carbon Footprint Questionnaire, I noticed how much points driving a car everywhere added to my total carbon footprint, while using public transportation barely did anything to my total. Renewable energy is also an amazing idea!

I agree and support each idea! I believe that each of the ideas listed here will benefit and make a good sustainable city but I also believe that it would be amazing to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Many ideas listed already do reduce carbon dioxide emissions, but there are many more. Some of which are making things energy efficient, less consumption of red meat, solid waste management and eating local products. Not only does reducing carbon dioxide emissions benefit the economy with employment, but it is also better in public health and for the environment. Carbon dioxide emissions affect the environment by trapping heat, which increases temperature, leading to more effects of climate change. According to the University of Leeds, their statistics show that carbon dioxide emissions will actually improve the economy and will have more of a benefit.

Source for University of Leeds report
https://newclimateeconomy.report/workin … 060718.pdf

I agree! Thinking of examples of our own personal ideas for sustainable cities is a great idea! One thing is, I think that we should work on thinking of ways to improve upon our current cities, making them more efficient and sustainable, but still within the realm of possibility. One way we could make our own city more sustainable is working on composting more personally, and being more aware of how much energy we use. Also, our state government could put in place laws that would increase the cost of fossil fuels and decrease the cost of sustainable energy, prompting a boost in sustainable energy, and hopefully boosting the economy even more as an added bonus.

If I were to plan a city so that it was sustainable, I would provide buses and bikes for public transportation. In addition, I would use some of the city's funding to install solar panels on at least fifteen percent of the buildings in the city. Furthermore, I would have a composting and recycling system. Finally, I would build the city so it is nearby organic farms that the city would buy most of its food from. I would be more likely to live in a city with these qualities because my daily activities would then contribute less to my carbon footprint, so I would not have to feel as guilty about these activities.

To start, my sustainable city would make single use products better for the earth. More specifically, getting rid of any packaging that cannot be composted or recycled. This city would be beautiful and clean, ideally, motivating the citizens to keep it that way. An OPB news article, focuses on the problem of pollution on our environment, and ways we can help. OPB explains that when we throw items away they do not just say in the trash, they often end up in oceans and in nature, hurting and killing wildlife, and making the water less safe and dirty. I would want to live in the sustainable city because of the cleanliness and peacefulness of knowing there is not waste everywhere you look.   

https://www.opb.org/news/article/plasti … ernatives/

That's a great thought, but isn't their reasons that the real-worlds hasn't eliminated single-use plastics? In addition, do you think that this generation of humans is capable of committing to something like this "sustainable city"? Many people are so ingrained in their ways of thinking that they would reject a system like this and say something really dumb.

I think fast food restaurants should alow costumers to bring their own containers for their food. Because it wastes material and causes unessesary polution, to have so much packaging around food. How much material do you think is wasted each day around the globe because of this.

For my sustainable city, I would first ban single use plastics. Items like straws, bags, and shipping packaging that are plastic aren't very sustainable, and create a lot of waste. I would also try to convert everyone to more sustainable energy for their homes other than natural gas. Hydro, wind and solar energy are all less destructive sources of energy than gas. Finally, I would encourage the people in my city to cut down on beef. The beef industry creates large amounts of methane, and by not eating beef, the demand for beef is smaller.

I think that something very vital for a sustainable city is public transportation. The best way of transportation is walking or biking but for some people that is not an option, so buses or BART (metro) is a better option than just driving. For example, I live relatively far from my school, so biking or walking would not be an option for me. Because of this, I take the bus to school to try to help the carbon emissions. According to reason.org, buses save about 14 million tons of carbon rather than taking a car a year. This means that if everyone tried to take the bus instead of taking their car, the carbon emissions could go down.
This is obviously not possible for everyone but if it is possible for you, I strongly encourage you to do so because it could help the environment greatly. Trying to walk, bike, or take the bus could get us one step closer to a sustainable city.
https://reason.org/commentary/does-bus- … reenhouse/

A huge amount of our carbon production comes from transportation although it’s very convenient to just dive your car every where but it also produces way more pollution. A common solution is to bike to school or work but as many know this isn’t always an option either they can’t afford a bike or it’s to slow or destination is to far off. But their is hope, public transportation taking a bus or train or some other form of public transportation is often faster than riding a bike and is less polluting than a car so this is the method I use for general transportation.

This is very true. Transportation does contribute to a colossal amount of Carbon dioxide emissions. The simple solution to this issue would be to not use transportation that emits carbon dioxide. Riding your bike or walking instead of driving substantially lowers the amount of carbon dioxide. Although, this is not possible for many cases. For instance, I live a 35 minute drive away from my school. I cannot simply walk or ride my bike to school. It is unrealistic. This is where public transportation comes into play. For example, BART. BART stands for Bay Area Rapid Transit. This form of public transportation will prevent me from emitting carbon dioxide from my house all the way to school. It will also save gas money and get me to school quicker than a car can. I would not have to worry about traffic and other opposing unknown factors. In an article called, "9 Benefits of Public Transportation", it states,"By moving people more efficiently, public transit produces significantly less air pollution per passenger mile than a standard car carrying a single driver. Buses emit 20% less carbon monoxide, 10% as much hydrocarbons, and 75% as much nitrogen oxides per passenger mile than an automobile with a single occupant". This means that with every person that rides public transport (lowering the amount of air pollution) instead of driving, they are saving the environment one action at a time.

Source: https://www.nationalexpresstransit.com/ … portation/

A white roof can benefit heat levels in urban areas because a white roof is more reflective of sunlight than a dark roof. White roofs reflect 90% of sunlight compared to the 20% that a black roof reflects. White roofs also reduce co2 emissions. "Replacing dark roofs with white ones every 1000 square feet would result in equivalent co2 offset of 10 metric tons."-the white roof project forums. They also help the increasingly prominent problem of extreme urban heat greatly, with white roofs that help keep heat from getting trapped in urban areas.

This was definitely new information to me. I am shocked by the numbers in these changes and impressed the shingles can offset 10 metric tons of carbon waste.

I think this is a great idea and this information is definately surprising to me. But I think some people may not care that it decreases there carbon footprint because it's an aesthetic thing. Also I believe most people will be too lazy to get someone to come out and paint their roof white.

That is amazing and more people should do this. But some people can be just too lazy and just honestly not care.

New houses should be built with white roofs.

Im suprised that this is a viable solution and that it actully reduces co2 emissions although I also wonder why it hasnt already been done because it seems pretty simple to make roofs white.

Painting roofs white is a great idea. To expand a little more on this idea, the reason that white roofs help to slow global warming, is that they reflect rays of sunlight back into the atmosphere. This reflection prevents the earth from absorbing these rays, which would otherwise heat up the earth. It is best to avoid heating up the planet as much as possible, considering the damage that is already being done by the heating of the earth caused by the greenhouse effect. Not only does this strategy apply to buildings, but roads as well. (1)According to a study by Emeritus Art Rosenfeld, “making roofs and pavements around the world more reflective could offset 44 billion tons of CO2 emissions.” This would be a huge help to slowing down climate change and could make a big impact on the future of our society.

1.  https://newscenter.lbl.gov/2014/01/21/w … c-payoffs/

for a more sustainable city, we need to ban single use plastics like straws and bags, encourage electric cars and solar panels and cut down meat consumption just to start. this problem is getting too big and out of hand and changes need to become more drastic and are needed sooner. everyone needs to do something before its too late. we need to work together and keep this world liveable for the future generations.

To further elaborate on the transportation aspect, a couple more adjustments can be made. One of the biggest issues in cities is transportation. In cities, congestion is a common occurrence and is a large contributing factor in carbon emissions. A possible solution could be installing smarter stoplights. According to the University of Southampton, the smart traffic lights not only help with congestion, they also have created an economic benefit of 29 million euros from 2009-2014. The economic benefit of the smart traffic lights could be contributed to other ways of creating a more sustainable city. For instance, enhancing the current public transportation system and encouraging other methods of transportation such as bicycling. Examples of this can be seen in Copenhagen, where a bridge was created for the sole use of bikes. Another way to encourage more environmentally friendly transport would be the Bus Rapid Transport (BRT) system in Johannesburg which creates dedicated bus routes. Through promoting eco-friendly transportation and smart traffic lights, the cities can be made much more environmentally sustainable.

I think that the most reliable kind of energy would be solar panels yes they may be expensive and hard to install but its a clean energy and a more eco-friendly energy

I think the same since for years we have been wasting many things due to the fact of not being informed on this topic. And I also think that we all have to start making a change like using less cars and using the bicycle more since it helps us to have good health

Stop using plastic

we can use plastic as long as we recycle and dispose of it properly

Nowadays, the use of plastic is uncontrollable and only a few types of plastic are actually recyclable. It's not because we throw plastic away in the recyclable bin that it will surely be recycled. We should use reusable bags instead on plastic ones and buy fruits and vegetables bunk to limit the use of plastic.

If we don't use plastic utensils, we will have to use metal utensils. Even though recyclable plastic is hard to find, it's still easier to break down than metal.

I am choosing to approach this question a little differently. Building another city does not make a ton of sense. It is just going to be really expensive and make more carbon emissions. On the other hand, improving a city would be less expensive and cause fewer carbon emissions. Some things you could do is give people tax cuts for having solar panels and electric cars. Make it cheaper for people to go eco-friendly. For example, do not charge for reusable bags and straws. Do not give people a straw at a restaurant unless they ask for one and add it to their bill. Make it harder for people to be mean to the environment and make it easier for people to be nicer. There may be some outrage at first but people will adjust pretty quickly if there are benefits to going green. Setting a good example could inspire other citys and that could turn into counties and cause a domino effect of a healthy environment.

I think that the exercise here is supposed to just forget the costs of building an actual city but focus on the smaller programs that could help the city reduce carbon emissions. By in-large though you seem to answer the questions, and well at that. Making it cheaper for people to have eco-friendly items and setting examples for other cities are undoubtably important programs to run. I think that making solar panels cheaper to access in particular as well as increasing the use of public transportation in the hypothetical city. These could help reduce carbon emissions if many cities implement these types of programs.

I think that my ideal city would focus on the decrease on plastic everyday items which are produced by burning fossil fuels. I would start by banning plastic everyday items. Huge brands like Starbucks and any bubble tea shops still use plastic straws which are only used once and thrown away. Plastic is used for literally everything from toothbrushes to packaging for everything. I would encourage citizens to use more sustainable options. I would have homes opt for solar panels and overall ban plastic usage and production.

My sustainable city would rely almost entirely on public transportation and other means that would limit an increase of carbon into the atmosphere. Implementing types of sustainable technologies, like windmills and a larger amount of electric cars, will dramatically reduce the carbon compared to other sources of energy and transportation. For example, riding public rail systems produce 62% less and bus transit produces 33% less carbon than, for instance, taking individual rides from a gasoline-powered car. Other actions, like implementing stringent trash acts and a plastic ban would remove the yearly 56 gigatons of carbon produced by plastic bags alone. Through actions like these, we can take the first steps to limit the carbon in the atmosphere. Works cited: https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations … ansit-role, https://www.npr.org/2019/07/09/73584848 … hole-story

My sustainable city would consist of public transport, a strict littering and correct sorting of waste materials rule, less plastic containers, and windmills. Public transportation is crucial towards a sustainable city because more public transportation, such as buses, decreases individual transportation, reducing an unnecessary amount of carbon. According to FTA officials, "public transportation also benefits those not using it because it helps reduce energy consumption, greenhouse gases and other pollutants." If a city is filled with trash on the floors, the trash can release harmful toxins. If waste materials are not properly sorted, additional pollution will occur. Instead of having many plastic containers of drinks in stores, there could be reusable containers and/or fountains used to fill the containers up. Finally, windmills are an environmental friendly way of achieving electricity by wind power.
https://www.southuniversity.edu/news-an … tion-31178

I believe that torturing people is not gonna help our carbon footprint

I think my sustainable city would have wind turbines that would use the strong waves that are common near seashores. I would also use the waves along the sea to generate energy. I would set up machines to treat the water waste and turn them into fresh usable drinkable water instead of just dumping the dirty water back into the sea. I would also use the recycling plants to recycle items instead of dumping trash back into the sea. I would set up more public transportation such as boats and buses. I would also make sure that the boats would not travel over areas where protected animals and plants where present.

Ok verry interessant
I agree

Lowering carbon emission rate on global scale is a very slow process. It requires thousands of hours of hard work and millions of people working on it. It also requires the right project idea to be executed. These ideas should be solutions of engineering nature and divided into smaller and more specific problems (e.g. idea that would reduce the need of using cars, like smarter street design, underground tunnels, electric cars, hyperloop, or system that would allow you to work from home...). One of those ideas might be building more self sustainable cities as it would paint the picture of how cities should be like. They would rely mostly on solar and wind power and they would reuse every drop of water that has ever passed through them. Building more self sustainable cities that look appealing would motivate more people to work on this problem.

Do you think we could make your city sustainable if we take power from the water , wind and sun?

We could make a city self-sustainable, but we also need to put research into more efficient lights and such

and public transportation, like a subway system. Seattle’s city bus system sucks

I think that city's can be much more sustainable and we have the technology to do it know clean energy like wind solar are already able to take over for energy use and it would cost less money to do so its just the willingness of people to change that makes it hard to do so,

I do think so, but right now I don't feel like the technology is good enough yet. For example, solar panels only get power on clear days, but in places like Seattle, those might not come too often. And the problem with getting power from water is that then we disturb fish breeding paths and then disturb everything up the food chain from there. We need to work on these problems before we can really make the transition.

We need to work on conserving energy as well.

Yes i think we would be able to do it, in fact, their is already a building were i live that has a very small footprint on the world, the building is made almost entirely of recycled materials, it is entirely powered by solar energy from solar panels on the roof, the energy is also stored so if the whole city of seattle had a power outage that building would still how power. Another cool feature of this building is they use foaming toilets that use way less water when flushing, they also recycle most of the collected waste and turn it into fertilizer. They also have a sustainable garden on their roof.

It would also take a very long time to make a sufficient subway system in Seattle

So many people have settled and simple ways that they live their life, often not eco - friendly. How can people like me become motivated to change a large part of their life?

I believe something I can change is carpooling more or limiting my charging time less. What would you change about your lifestyle Gray L?

A couple years ago I decided to bike everywhere I possibly could instead of taking a car or a bus to try and cut down on my carbon emissions. But that’s just what I did. What would you want to change your lifestyle.

I think if we use more solar energy in cities, then less fossil fuels will be burned to create energy and therefore, climate change will hopefully reduce.

One way I think we could do that is by implementing windmills and solar panels.

The US should invest in more wind power.

My sustainable city would use solar and electric energy to power homes and eliminate the use of gas. There would also be quality public transportation along with regulations for the amount of gas families/individuals can use during a undetermined period of time. Overall, the goal would be to limit the amount of fossil fuels being burned unnecessarily and only use them when absolutely necessary.

I agree with the plans for your sustainable city. I would also add dams and wind turbines that could be used for energy along with solar panels.

if everyone put solar panels on top of their houses we would probably have enough energy to power our homes and more

Get the most eco friendly electricity system that can power the whole city

I think my sustainable city would have wind turbines that would use the strong waves that are common near seashores. I would also use the waves along the sea to generate energy. I would set up machines to treat the water waste and turn them into fresh usable drinkable water instead of just dumping the dirty water back into the sea. I would also use the recycling plants to recycle items instead of dumping trash back into the sea. I would set up more public transportation such as boats and buses. I would also make sure that the boats would not travel over areas where protected animals and plants where present.

It's a very interesting idea that you have and I totally see the upside of a city like this. I have a few questions though, In case of a natural disaster such as a Tsunami, what precautions would you take to provide safety to your different infrastructures such as power and your water treatment plants?. Now is your city on the surface of the water, or is it on land and near the beach, if so how would you take on the rising sea levels because of global warming?. Finally, would your city be a zero-waste city such as Kamikatusu?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS9uhASKyjA

Because of it’s cost and possible risk this is not an option that is generally considered but it along with renewable energy would be incredibly beneficial. Nuclear energy facilities that are properly run and take care of waste properly could run whole cities.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/z … revision/2

I completely agree, I think of nuclear energy as a double edged sword in this context it has its goods side which is it will provide you with sustainable energy at cheap cost without depleting much of the environment.At the same time it also has numerous bad sides, for example nuclear radiation if not taken care of properly could pollute the existing surrounding environment and also if there was any mistake in the handling of the nuclear or if there was an explosion it could be similar to Fukushima and Chernobyl, which we could see that there is still nuclear radiation till these days with unlivable conditions for humans.

There are many European countries that are constantly bragged about in the realm of politics and media now a days as they have become pinnacles in their own right. That being said, we have the ability and knowledge as to become greener here already so I'm wondering what cities in the U.S have put into practice already what currently talk about so much in trying to do on a broader range.

Ways a city could work to become sustainable is to use a composting system where the compost could go back into the group to hold carbon, and grow healthier and stronger plants. Also, eliminating plastic is important because the production and recycling of plastics create emissions.

I think that there are many easy solutions that cities could use to emit less carbon. One of them is if we used LED, solar powered streetlights. That would cut down on power consumption by a lot. Another thing that we could do is to have much higher minimums on fuel efficiency for cars being sold today. That would help the transportation footprint move farther down. Another solution is to promote and encourage composting citywide. There could be a tax break for houses that contribute a certain amount of compost to the city, which could reduce waste production, and it would help in promoting healthy eating habits. There could also be some regulations on how many incandescent lights there are in each household, and some kind of reward for having all LEDs and having a low home footprint. These are all simple actions that cities could take, and they could make a big difference in the overall footprint.

Yes that's true, changing LED lights is a great way to save some electricity and using solar panel is very smart. Doing this really help our city's environment to get better (well even though it's very good already.) Nice work there!

I agree, I think that cities should focus on implementing smaller solutions to combat this problem especially because of the inaction from the government. I also think that the US should invest in more public transportation to climate the amount of cars on the roads and offer a more sustainable way to get around. I also think that as individuals we can do a lot like paying more attention to where our goods come from. I work in an environmentally sustainable clothing store and I don't think people understand the severity of the fact that most of the big brands engage very damaging practices that harm the environment.

In my Sustainable City all energy would be produced by renewable energy sources like Solar and Wind power. My city would be small enough so everyone could ride their bikes everywhere or electric cars, so they wouldn’t have to worry about too much transportation emissions . The whole city would have a water recycling system that would filter used water and put it back into the water system. The city would also have a composting plant and would be built out of reused materials. My cities focus would be on forming community to inspire sustainability.

In my city, there would be many factors that would emit less carbon. One of them is that only electric and hybrid cars would be sold. This would decrease CO2 emissions while people are driving. Transportation is a major emitter of CO2. So, another thing that will help that is many clean, comfortable city buses. Although buses are larger, they can carry many people which will ultimately decrease CO2 levels. All of the markets and stores would be encouraged to advertise locally grown meat that is grass-fed. Vegetarianism would also be encouraged for some meals to reduce emissions. Also, people would encourage others to be more carbon efficient. My city would be clean and big enough to earn money but small enough to keep emissions low.

I like these ideas and I would implement some laws and regulations that encourage these ideas. For example, laws about where food such as meat is coming from and how it is grown or made to completely make sure that this is what is being sold. I would also add laws about things like solar panels and other forms of alternative energy and laws about water and gas use. I like your addition about how everyone would encourage each other because I think that word of mouth is the best way to get a message out and it a good way to promote change collectively.

These are really good ideas about trying to reduce carbon. If we get people to drive electric and hybrid cars all over the world our carbon footprint would decrease a lot. Our world would be so much better if we grow our meats that is grass-fed. If we encourage people in our communities and around the world we could reduce our carbon emissions by quite a lot.

Cameron E DLB

yes that would make me want to live there because there would be low carbon transportation and other strategies to reduce the citizens carbon footprint.

The city would be eco friendly, would recycle unused materials and only use renewable energy sources. People would most likely want to live there because of the clean air and healthy environment.

The city would would have wind turbines and solar panels in general it would be full of renewable energy sources I agree with my with the other student of having LEED building.I would want to live there because I know my bills would be low and the air would be clean and I know I will be helping the environment.

In my city, to reduce carbon emissions there would be a general subway system that would go to every major part of the city. People would either pay for a cheap yearly membership or it would be free. It would reduce the need for car use and would decrease carbon emissions by not having people drive as much.

Smaller cities should have electric hop on-hop off busses. Then the average citizen won’t have to use their personal car and hopefully one day people won’t have a personal car. Do you agree?

If you are not aware LEED is a grading system for buildings for sustainably, energy use, and footprint. There are different levels a building can earn from plain old certified to platinum. I think if we can make all new construction be at least LEED certified and slowly raise that bar we can slowly and efficiently make cities become sustainable.

With modern and low carbon transportation in mind, reducing the carbon footprints of people would probably involve limiting the amount of people in a house or apartment to maybe 2-3 so consumption of energy isn't as high and most transportation would be by bicycle.

Also cars should be made more efficient, along with less harmful emissions. Food production should also try to cut the amount of greenhouse gases made. And the limit of people living in a house shouldn't include anyone under 18 and pets. Biking could be a clean way to move around but I don't see it being the main transportation that people use for long.

You would also have to account the food people need for energy to ride the bicycle because it gives energy but it still counts towards their carbon footprint. Maybe consume locally grown food?

JOTARO...

I think the biggest change to most cities would be no culdesacs. The layout makes getting anywhere take twice as long and the large lawns are a waste of space. Nothing is within walking distance so you have to rely on cars so it's not even a safe space for kids to play since cars are always going down the road.
I would make smallish apartment complexes within walking distances to the things you need. You would have more public transport to get to places out of reach. You wouldn't have large corporations for things like a grocery store like Safeway or Walmart you would have smaller local businesses.

As the 5G technology being developed better and better, this can make the city smarter and connect more together. In this Big Data Era, as people getting to know more information easier, many of the complicate things can be cut off. Take the example of the trash can in the University of California, Berkeley (UC Berkeley), they are very smart. When I went to UC Berkeley's event, they told me that their trash can in the campus use power from the solar panel and squish the trash so they can store as much as possible. Also, when the trash is getting full, the trash can will send a message to contact people to pick them up, this can avoid people picking up trash everyday and which they can drive less and produce less CO2. There are also lots of these kinds of new technology that makes the city sustainable.

There are many ways to create a sustainable city. One of the easiest ways is to switch to LED bulbs, this can help reduce your need of electricity and is very easy to do. Other ways include using electric cars, installing solar panels, and even creating a more walkable city atmosphere. This might be difficult for a whole city to do, however there are other things that people can do individually as well, such as throwing away less food, composting, and eating a more plant based diet. You might not live somewhere where it is easy to walk places to limit your CO2 emissions, but easy things like switching your light bulbs to LED, helps create a difference, and potentially could help lead to a sustainable city.

I think that this makes a lot of sense, and that you show a lot of really good solutions. I really like the fact that you included the part about eating a "plant based diet." I think that makes a lot of sense, and it's an easy thing for people to change in their everyday lives. Maybe you could have expanded on the "walkable city atmosphere" a little bit more, but other than that I think this makes really good points.

The first point in making a sustainable city is to not make unsustainable things available where its possible. According to https://www.nationalgeographic.com/envi … story-ban/ 500 million straws are used everyday in just the US alone and solute beaches and oceans. This not only effects the looks of our beaches, but the Eco system inside of them. This could easily be reduced by a place like Starbucks simply not supplying them. Instead of using disposable plastic straws they could supply paper straws or have a discount if you bring a metal one. Also grocery stores all should carry reusable bags and instead or plastic bags they should only have paper bags. A sustainable city would also include lots of fuel efficient transportation and cars, but ideally cars would be used and most transportation would be from bikes or walking.

I think that your point is very insightful! I agree with your idea of riding small plastic items and replacing them with other alternatives. I also think that public CO2 efficient transportation is a great alternative to our current situation, however, personally, I don't feel that that change will happen as soon as we would hope. I take public transit a lot and think that it is a great alternative, but I do also understand the hassle and inconsistency that it comes with. I feel that instead, an easier idea would be to produce more CO2 efficient cars or other modes of transportations that can be more easily accessible. While I do understand that it is not easy and quick for people to switch and buy a new car, but if car companies provided more options for CO2 efficient alternatives, eventually, most if not all of the cars could be CO2 efficient. I personally know of many cars that serve a CO2 efficient alternative, but most of these cars are quite pricey. If someone could invent a cheaper alternative, I feel that our world could become more eco-friendly.

I agree with every point you made. The straw pollution is a huge issue in the US right now, but we've made a lot of steps in the right direction. I think your idea of stores giving an incentive to bring reusable products is a great idea, and has many benefits for people and the environment. To add onto you idea of promoting use of bikes and walking, I think it is very important for cities to be pedestrian friendly, with safe, clean sidewalks and bike lanes to promote these environmentally friendly modes of transportation. In Oakland, they have been implementing safer bike lanes, which are protected by parked cars. This, of many is a important step into a greener, sustainable city.

I agree with your statements. It is hard to make a sustainable city in this day in age. Everyone has their own wants and needs and it costs a lot of money. To make a city eco-friendly and still have that city vibe is hard to do. With the straw thing, it is terrible that, that many straws are used every day. There needs to be a ban on them and or make it a material that dissolves overtime.

As a follow up to my idea, the Ergon Energy Network states that "By choosing to drive an EV you are helping to reduce harmful air pollution from exhaust emissions. An EV has zero exhaust emissions". This shows that driving a more sustainable car reduces our carbon footprint and further cuts down on CO2 levels.

I agree with you 100%, I also think it's interesting how Starbucks has a discount when you bring in your own reusable cup, but not when you bring in your own reusable straw. According to http://money.com/money/5343736/how-many … every-day/  there are 7.5 million plastic straws polluting U.S. If just one large chain like starbucks had policies of changing their straws to paper, and having discounts for people who bring in reusable straws, we would see the number slowly decrease.

I agree! By getting rid of the small plastic it will reduce the waste in the world, as well as help, save the animals affected by the trash that we produce. According to, https://thelastplasticstraw.org/ U.S consumes enough plastic straws to wrap around the world 2.5 times a day. By cutting down on the number of singles use straws we can create a better environment.

I agree that if you truly want a sustainable city, you can't make it easy for people to waste and contribute to global warming. As I have seen down my street, many places such as Starbucks and Fenton's are becoming more eco friendly minor companies. Both have switched from plastic straws and utensils to compostable one which many other places are starting to do as well.

When creating my city I would first off require that if you are planning to go somewhere within the span of 1 mile, you have to ride a bike or use some other form of transportation that doesn't produce C02. I would also require that kids be taught how and what to recycle which is similar to what a city in Brazil did and now they are the greenest city in the world. Next I think that carpooling is a great way to reduce C02 emissions as well as other public forms of transportation, but only if you have to. Stores would sell locally grown and organic food without and plastic packaging and would hand you your groceries in a mesh bag. Bikes would be put around the city as well (much like our own) and lastly garbage cans would be distinctly displayed with what and what cannot be put inside of it.

If you are going somewhere and it’s close enough try biking or even walking. If it is further or maybe cold out try carpooling. Also it really is not that hard to recycle and recycling goes a long way.

I agree recycling is a great thing to do to help out. Recycling can be very easy just collect all of you bottles then once you have too many and go to your local Hannaford and they have can recycling there. Just remember that walking and carpooling can go a far way then driving your self when you could have walked very easily.

To make a more sustainable city I would create more policies to get more people to get solar panels and other sustainable energy. There would also be was to get more people to get other things like rain catchers. There would also be more bike lanes and skytrains or buses. This would encourage more of that which would mean less cars

the world will continue to be polluted if we don't reduce our carbon emissions and wastes of food and energy.
everyone may change his own life if we know how many wastes and emissions we make per year.
perhaps we won't  change our entire way to live but, se will certainly reduce our carbon footprint.
we should reuse a lot of items, use sustainable energy and remove fossil fuels which ruin the environment.
with these simple things the world will be healthier

In my city, I would make it a electric-car only city. If everyone used electric cars, then the pollution would be like 10x better than what it is now. The air would be better to breathe and more healthier too. This probably isn't realistic, but what we can do to make the pollution better, is to carpool. Think about it, if you carpool with 2 other people instead of you guys all going separate, that is 2 less cars that are driving, which means that that is 2x less gas being wasted which would make the pollution better over time.

Although a city with only electric cars would be ideal, I agree in saying it is not realistic. I do think, however, we can make our way to that goal. We can put pressure on politicians to give even more benefits to electric car drivers. If more benefits were given to electric car drivers than more people would consider switching.

I agree with you. Cars in many modern cities cause lots of pollution, through the combustion of fossil fuels. Ideally, all people

should*

I totally agree with you that electric cars should be used. I think the current problem that needs adjustment is that brands like Tesla are luxury vehicles, and very far out of most people's price point. I think brands need to take into consideration the planet instead of profit because the difference s substantial

I agree with the politician pressure. This makes sense because if more benefits are given to electric cars, that would highly encourage other people to switch over to electric cars. Maybe they would consider spending the extra money to get an electric car because of all the benefits and impact that it would have on the world.

Today there are many means of transport, but the people continue to use his/her own autos to go to job or to go to make a turn. To improve the environment where we live, we should begin to use public transport the more possible.

I definitely agree with this statement. Not only does it represent an idea which should be adopted by others, it is straightforward and seems logical. Public transportation is not as utilized as it could be.

This is definitely a great way to reduce problems in the environment, I totally agree. If there are less personal vehicles, and instead trains, buses or something of the sort that would carry more people at a time, it could cut down on emissions. Also, if these trains or buses became electric (at least the ones that aren't already) it could continue to cut down on cO2.

I agree with you and I want to add that most of cars takes often only one man/woman or maximum two (I noticed by myself where I live, in Switzerland). If more people started using public transport, the emission of CO2 would decrease. I can understand that the car is more convenient, but if, at least during the week, you can take a public transport, it will be better. Maybe you go with the car to the station (I think of the train) closest your home, so you could emmit less CO2.

I agree. But also use more eco friendly vehicles to drive around

I agree with this but the thing is that some people can't be around other people, it's either because of a personal reason or a medical reason

If a lot of people would take public transports , CO2 emmissions would decrease and we wuold have more time because there would be less traffic jam caused by personal vehicles. But I aggre with joseph141 too: if you use the car not so often (only when you really need it), it's ok because the environment will not be hardly damaged.

I think public transportation is a good way to reduce emissions, but it is not always convenient. In the US, public transportation is not very popular. There are only a few places where this is a big thing. I think if public transportation was more accessible, more people would use it. Then fewer cars would be used. Where I live, public transportation signs are not that noticeable and they are not easy to walk to. Also, I like the Idea of making public transportation vehicles eco-friendly. This can make a huge impact if a lot of people use them.

This is a great idea because public transport emits less and less energy as we continue to use it. I can also add that if we add incentives to riding the bus or taking BART, it would make it a lot easier. This will also spur the government to create more “green” buses that emit less carbon dioxide. ProTerra, a company that makes electric buses for public transportation, it says that “A typical diesel bus emits more than 229,000 lbs. of greenhouse gases annually, while a CNG bus emits 219,083 lbs./year and a diesel hybrid emits 163,286 lbs./year.” There is a 65,714 lb difference in the typical diesel and diesel hybrid. So, electric buses are clearly better than regular ones, and they are public, so they would help save even more carbon dioxide. On the ProTerra website, it says that “A switch to zero-emission buses, which emit no tailpipe pollution, presents a critical opportunity to cut pollution, reduce oil dependence and make Earth a better place.” So, this is a  crucial part of getting people to ride the bus because they feel like they are making a huge difference in the world.

Many valid points have been brought up about public transportation. Although it is a great way to reduce carbon emissions, it can be inconvenient sometimes. There are many different forms of public transportation including BART and public buses. Another smart way to reduce carbon emissions in the air is to carpool. Biking, scootering, or walking are all healthier ways to get to where you need to go as well. In this article, https://www.citylab.com/transportation/ … it/572167/ an explanation is given for why public transportation in the United States is not as popular as it is in other countries around the world. It is unfortunate that this is the case, but Americans can definitely start to try and make a difference in reducing the amount of carbon emissions released into the air by using these healthier methods.

I agree with this. The reality is that while many people utilize public transportation, many still do not because of several different circumstances. However, there are still ways to reduce carbon emissions. Just because one, for example, can't take the bus to work or school, that doesn't mean that they can't carpool, bike, or take BART. Many cars emit large amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere. Therefore, doing things like carpooling, even if only once or twice a week, can go a long way in terms of reducing the amount of carbon we emit into the atmosphere.

Yes, I agree that taking public transit is a great way to cut down on CO2 emissions but the harsh reality is that not everyone has access to it. What I mean by this is not everyone can take the train or take the bus to work/school. sometimes its just not possible. I take the bus to school but  that is because i have access to it since it is close to my house. however i know people that do not take the bus just because it is such an inconvenience to themselves. Just in America alone public buses save an estimated 1.4 billion gallons of gas which translates into about 14 million tons of co2. So once again public transportation is a very good idea and is very effective in slimming co2 emissions but sometimes it is just not a viable option.

I agree that in order to reduce the amount of Carbon Dioxide being let into the air public transportation would be a great idea because it would improve the air quality. Places in the world vary on public transportation since not every place has great public transportation. For example, the US does not have an efficient transportation system compared to other places around the world. In the US most public transportation is unreliable and also takes a long time. In the article, "The real reason American public transportation is such a disaster" it states that the real reason that US public transportation is not efficient is that they offer few hours, do not offer a lot of routes and in some cases can be dangerous. Public transportation would be a great idea except it is an inconvenience so driving yourself is easier but not good for the environment. There are other options, carpooling with a friend or if the distance is walkable it would greatly reduce the amount of CO2 being released into the air from cars. Another option is an electric car however no everyone has to mon ey to go out and buy a new car.
Link: https://www.vox.com/2015/8/10/9118199/p … bway-buses

I would love to take public transportation, however, it seems as some ways of transportation are quite expensive and unpractical. I will look for as many ways as I can to carpool or take public transportation in the future.

This is a great, easy way to help improve the environment around us! After school I take the bart back home and there are many people getting transported by only one train, rather than having the hundreds of people on the bart drive individual cars. This is a simple contribution that everyone can do at one point. Or even just carpooling to places will help the environment.

If we would want to grow our society sustainably I would think that would start with using less energy around the house. After that people could use their cars less to emit less carbon dioxide and use less fossil fuels. Also, a good way to grow sustainably is to recycle and compost waste so it can be reused as something valuable.

I totally support your idea of people should use less energy around the house. Some people love to turn the light on although it is during the daytime. This will be a huge waste of electricity and produce a plenty of carbon dioxide since some light bulbs are LED light bulbs. People need to realize how bad this will cause and start saving electricity.  Depending on the reading I saw "Saving Energy By Turning Off Lights" by Aaron Kase, She points out decrese the using time of light bulb can actually educe electricity usage and extend the life of the light bulbs. It is really valuable to use less electricity inside people's house as less as they can.

In my specific city, I would promote the use of environmentally safe vehicles, more public transportation options, and utilizing methods, such as carpooling, in every day life. These solutions would hopefully result in less emissions being produced by automobiles which would eventually reduce the city's overall carbon footprint. Another aspect of this city would be to encourage citizens to donate various used products and/or objects which would both benefit the environment and those in need.

Natalei, 14
North Carolina

Public transportation, as well as personal vehicles, have proved to be harmful to the environment. People who sit in gas-powered cars contribute to the declining health of the earth as well as those who sit in a gas powered bus. One way we could help this cause is to find a greener way to travel. Methods such as biking, skateboarding, walking, running, scootering, etc. are much healthier for the environment. It also benefits the human body to receive exercise as one transports oneself from different places.

The hub and spoke method has been used in cities all over around the world. It was invented in 1955 and consists of things, or spokes branching of the main hub. This is a perfect design for a city as it decreases the amount of travel need to go around the city and makes it easy to include transportation. This is also a great design as you can expand very easily, by rebuilding cities in the hub and spoke it also makes it easier to change and implement new technology.
https://www.polarising.com/2016/09/hub- … hitecture/

The city would puts ads around to carpool, take the bus, walk, or ride your bike to school more. There will be bikes around the city that you can use to get places for pretty cheap prices. There would also be compost bins and recycling bins everywhere that will be distinctly recognizable so you don't throw the wrong thing in the wrong bin. There would not be so many factories, maybe a few though. Most of the food in stores will be locally grown and packaged in reusable containers.

I believe if we want to grow our sustainability in our cities we will need, to encourage people to carpool more. I think carpooling is a super easy way to put in fewer greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. In the website https://bcgreencare.ca/carpooling-has-big-impact, it says “On average, sharing a ride with one other person to work and back will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 3.72 kilograms (Source: Transport Canada). If you were to share a ride all year long, together you would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by approximately 893 kilograms.”  In conclusion, I think carpooling is an easy and fun way to reduce the carbon you are putting in the atmosphere.

In my sustainable city, I would have lots of gas efficient ways of transportation. For example, I want to have a lot of city buses or a train that  can take lots of people around at once. The buses would be CO2 efficient, and would come often, to discourage people from taking cars. Or I would try to have something like taxis in New York. It would create a lot of jobs, and if the taxis always kept moving and there were a lot of them, people wouldn't use their cars as often. Another thing is that the cars could be mass produced to be hybrid or electric, and have massive charging stations all around town. This would cut down on the amount of CO2 that people emit into the air through transportation, the biggest category of CO2 emissions on average.

I believe these are all good ideas. When I calculated my footprint, I was below average for people in my state but above the average human. One thing that was above people in my state was transportation. I drive very far to school every day, and although I have a carpool, it emitted a lot of CO2. It is not that simple to just have these changes happen, nevertheless. Because they are running all day, buses and taxis do emit a lot of CO2. If these buses and taxis were CO2 efficient or electric, it might take time to charge. According to https://pod-point.com/guides/driver/how … ctric-car, it takes just under 8 hours to fully charge, meaning they would have to charge at night. However, they are capable of over 100 miles without dying, so if we could get them electric, it would emit a lot less CO2.

I do believe these are all good ideas, but change cannot just come that quick and easy. Buses would be nice but, the problem is, is that many people who don't like public transportation would resort back to cars as a more personal, comfortable way to get around. Also we can cut down on more CO2 emissions by having electric taxis or electric buses. The problem is also money. Not everybody has the money for electric vehicles, and not every local government wants to spend the money for electric vehicles. It's sad but it's the truth. There are many ways to lower CO2 levels for transportation, but there are many risks. In my opinion this is a "high risk, high reward" situation, and people just need to be ready to take that risk.

In my city I would take advantage of public transit and sidewalks so there could be minimal pollution as possible. Plastic is a big part of today’s world however, it leads to a lot of waste. One thing my city could invest in, is metal straws, no paper products and no plasticware in restaurants. This might require more cleaning but that opens new jobs. The gray water from cleaning dishes can be used before disposal, such as flushing toilets. Although the initial price is high, we could invest in solar panels which is cheaper in the long run. These are just some ideas that I would use if I had my own sustainable city.

It would most likely be a city with nice and refreshing air and more people using different forms of transportation other than cars.The environment would be clean.

The most of people need to try to be someone who is going at school by bike or different forms of transportation like as you said, and maybe we could save our planet !

I agree but just having sustainable forms of transportation will not be enough. In an ideal world, we would also cut back on meat consumption since cows release methane which is more powerful than carbon dioxide. If every one switched to a vegetarian diet or even cut back on their meat consumption and ate more chicken instead that would also help in a big way. We would also have to switch to renewable energy sources as well since we released almost 38.2 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere last year alone, but changing the way you get to places every day is a start.

I agree with your point of view. We can't just change one thing and expect it to change all of environmental problems. We have to change multiple factors, such as the ones you have listed, including less meat consumption and alternative energy sources as well as recycling, more efficient appliances, and more efficient transportation methods. When more factors are taken into consideration and efforts are being made to change them, there will be more beneficial results.

I completely agree! I think that the first step to making a positive impact on the environment is awareness. It is important that all members of society are aware of the dangerous state our environment is in and are aware of the significant impacts they are making. From there, as communities, people must move forward with more sustainable ways of living, including transportation, plastic use, food, home appliances, and much more.

I agree that there needs to be a bigger effort to conserve energy that is currently being used. Meat consumption, particularly beef, is very harmful to the environment because cows release a very large amount of methane. Additionally, in cities with so much public transportation, even though it is better than using cars, it would be more helpful if they used clean air. Some cities are also good about making it easy to use public transportation but others make it so difficult that people have to drive individually. Lastly, in cities, where so many developments are taking place, it is necessary to produce less waste and clean air because so much excess waste can be produced by construction and more.

Many countries are experiencing things like industrialization and rapid development. This leads to things like overpopulation and lots of pollution, we can do things to fix that though. We can make sure that we are using every bit of space that we have meaning putting more than one business in a building and making sure that you use multi-use buildings. We also need to make sure that the equipment that we are using to heat, cool, or power those building are as efficient as possible; meaning that we make sure that we have reusable power sources such as wind, solar, or hydroelectric energy.

I agree with your statement, finding alternative energy sources would be beneficial to the environment and more efficient. Using fossil fuels requires mining, transportation, as well as causing air pollution. They are many environmental and human health considerations with using fossil fuels. By using alternatives such as the ones you have listed, it would be beneficial to both humans and the environment.

All the buildings would be solar powered and wind powered the buildings wouldnt stack up so high. there would be city limits where only bikes and walking was permitted. all fresh fruits and veggies would be grown organically and in the city.

This is a dream, but their are some complications. First off, where could we put all of the solar panels and wind turbines? Also, we would have to find a way to efficiently store energy, better than we can with current tech, as it will not always be a sunny day and a windy night. I personally find that walking and biking works for me in short distances, but not longer ones, like across a large city. Places like Singapore have started building vertical farms that run up skyscrapers. These farms could help grow food within cities.

Adding on to that thought, a sustainable city would need a large stable energy system and enough supplies and resources to spread around. To keep a city healthy and thriving, you would need the technology to have it sustain itself from the inside, such as solar panels or using less gases in machines that release unhealthy fumes. Cities should start to build they own farms and grow crops without wasting the energy of transporting them from far distances. Sustaining a city is hard but if you are able to make a system of energy that conserves the amount of energy a city is using, you could cut back on a lot of waste.

Our Public transport to get around the city is great but can be improved. As great as it is to encourage cycling or walking to your destination, most would rather take advantage of the convenience of a car. That's why sustainability should start in a place citizens don't have to sacrifice anything for, public transit. It is already common knowledge that taking the local bus or Skytrain to work, school or even just get around is better for the planet, but there's still ways of improving it. Unfortunately larger vehicles like planes cannot yet run on solar panels but a simple bus or skytrain certainly could. Now of coarse this comes with it's own set of problems mainly concerning funding, as the city often has a tendency to be a bit cheap, but with enough people to back it up this could really happen. Not only would it make public transit more Eco friendly, but would also be setting an example for what other cities could do to start making a difference in regards to sustainability.

Although it is a good idea to make public transport greener, I find that most people including me sometimes either find it inconvenient, as you said, or are just too lazy to use public transport. We really need to focus on mass producing solar powered cars, because most people will use their car pretty much all the time. Although it will be expensive, it will be easier to power a small car with solar panels than a large bus or train. Also, a solar powered train would have a hard time storing energy for times when the sun is not out because of its large size and energy needs. A car would not face that problem because it is smaller with less demanding energy needs.

I believe that there should be more bike lanes as well as more encouragement towards riding bikes, especially in areas such as the downtown.

I agree with you, the focus in my city is enough room for cars to drive, but why are we not focusing on a sustainable way of transportation? I was looking at the people who were running for the election , and there was a person who in particular, wanted to get rid of the bike lanes all over my city. So in addition to not providing a sustainable future by building them, they wanted to get rid of the currently existing ones.

But, I do think that the answer to the problem is not just to complain.  You need to take initiative by voting, protesting and doing research, and emailing your ciry to talk about their environmental plans.

I agree. I think that bike lanes in major cities and also smaller suburban cities can make a big impact on the carbon footprints of societies around the world. We can already tell that places in the world where transportation is much more efficient, the carbon footprints of those citizens are much lower and cleaner. According to the adventure cycling association, biking is very good for the environment because it takes no fossil fuels or un-natural energy. If we could manage to insert bike lanes in just the right places, we could cut down on the amount of exhaust put into the atmosphere from daily commutes, or even just short drives. Although it seems like a small individual change, the accumulated effect could make a big difference.

https://www.adventurecycling.org/routes … al-impact/

I agree another idea that should be used more is the bike sharing (e.g Ford go bikes and other companies) because according to the science direct (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a … 1918304392) Who did research about bike sharing around the world found a big decrease in CO2 emissions, for example in Shanghai which decreased emissions by 25,240 tonnes in 2016 through bike sharing and saved 8,358 tonnes of petrol to, which clearly helps the environment. So more bike lanes and the overall promoting of bikes through adding bike lanes and the bike sharing system is very good for the environment.

Renewable energy is something that could end our use of fossil fuels.  Energy like solar, hydro, tidal, wind can change the way we use energy a lot. Say cities near the coast could use tidal and hydro. Areas that are sunny year-round could use solar power and cities that are more inland could use wind. So we should support the investment of renewable energy and use it when we have a choice.

I think that it is smart to use reusable energy because it is less polluting on the environment, and it can be used for the most part unlimited depending on the source. Things like wind and solar power are non-depletable but it may be hard to find an area that can provide you with a sufficient enough source of them to work.

I agree a city could be best with the reduction of fossil fuels along with the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. this would be good because the cities greenhouse carbon footprint would be a great thing.

In my city I would promote the use of donating to other people. There are so many times that people have clothes, toys, and other things around the house that they just throw out. Instead of doing this, and companies making more products, which would produce more pollutants, we can just donate our used products to people in need. That way products like this stay in the system longer. We get more use out of our clothes and toys. In this way, I think it would help reduce people's carbon footprint. I would also say that our transportation also needs to improve. As a city, more public transportation should be available, and those with cars should carpool. Less emissions from automobiles would be produced, and this would greatly reduce everyone's carbon footprint.

Sami, 15
North Carolina

I think our government should invest more money into our public system because people nowadays are lazy. Why would they want to walk 5 mins to get to the bus stop then wait another 10 mins for the bus to come when they can just walk down the stairs to their garage and drive their car.  Our government should really look into a better transit system which should include a better bus line with more bus stops and more frequent buses. I think that would encourage more people to use transit while the gas prices is really high right now.

I agree with that point. Plus the investment would pay dividends in the future because of a more efficient bus line that is used more. However, how would you convince the government to make the investment?

i would convince the government with the statistics on how much people takes transit everyday and how there's a difference between people taking the public transit and driving their personal vehicle. Another thing i would do is show them in some less populated places how the people has more difficulties accessing the transit system so the people there are forced to drive the car.

That is a very promising proposal. One thing I would also do would be to provide statistics about how regions with better public transport infrastructure are more productive. I know that in the Bay Area, improved public transport would do wonders for the workforce. If you actually make a proposal to the government, please let me know!

It is a great idea to construct better public transportation system to help reduce carbon emissions. We can build sharing electric cars station and sharing bike system to help people get around inside the city. Also I think the government can make policies to encourage people using public transportation or green energy vehicles.

First of all, I would invest more money in a public transit system. Transportation accounts for 29% of total carbon emissions and out of that 29%, 57% are Cars and SUV's. According to the Federal Transit Emission,  specifically using light rail systems save carbon emissions. These systems produce 62% less than solo automotive vehicles. These changes can radically help us to reduce carbon emissions.

I think i would equip all homes with electric powering to reduce the carbon emitted by burning coals or natural gas. I would invest more money into electric transit and recommend taking transit to ensure that no unnecessary carbon is released. I would also include a water saving plan to reduce the waste of water in the city.

We can plant more trees to decrease carbon dioxide level and also increase oxygen. We can decrease the number of cars and have everyone use public transport as much as possible to decrease the amount of ground-level ozone which is very bad for the environment. We also can introduce the bike system to keep people healthy and keep the air cleaner. We can organize or participate in a local cleanup to get rid of trash. We should remember that recycling also can help our city. Much of the material we could be recycling end up in landfills.

Although it may not seem like a very efficient process, local and sustainable clothing is actually a very probable alternative to clothing manufactured overseas. Sustainable clothing also has many environmental benefits. Sheep are often used in the procedure, and they eat grass for food. When the grass regrows, it pulls a ton of carbon out of the air into the roots and soil, cleaning the environment and promoting plant growth. Another advantage sustainable clothing has over materials such as polyester, nylon, spandex, etc., is their lack of microfibers. Microfibers are tiny plastic fibers that do not biodegrade, and often bind with the molecules of chemical pollutants. Microfibers have been found to cause health issues with small sea creatures such as plankton who eat them, and large amounts of microfibers have been found inside fish and  shellfish being sold. With the use of natural clothing, we can cut down on pollution and harmful materials being put out into t he environment.

Sources:
https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable … rel-oceans

https://www.patagonia.com/blog/2017/02/ … pollution/

I compleatly agree with this. The transportation and making of cloths done elsewhere is a huge problem. It creates a huge carbon footprint and it hurts other animals. Big brands like H&M and forever 21 make it seem like if its not trendy its not cool. Having your cloths made locally so awesome. They look super cute too.

Though I agree with your ideas, how do you think the costs of locally sourced and all-natural clothing would affect people with lower incomes? And do you think the money would be better spent on other ways of reducing our carbon footprint or other negative earthly effects in general?

It is a great idea however where would all these sheep be kept? How would you get people to buy this? No matter what, people will want what ever is the social norm. How can you make wool clothing a social norm. Maybe if big named brands started making wool clothing, more people would buy it.

This seems like a great idea, but from what I have heard, it seems like the raising of livestock is a huge contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in the United Sates. While I see how less shipping could lower costs and emissions, is it also possible that the sheep will emit carbon themselves? If not, is there a way to change the cattle growing process to make it more sustainable?

I think this is a great idea!  The transportation and making of cloths done elsewhere is a huge problem. This can hurt other animals and create a huge problem.

I think that this is a great idea. This is a good idea because transporting goods can be terrible for the environment and the things that live in it. The only thing is if you start using more expansive fabrics products will become more expansive and people will become unable to buy them and they will go to waste.

This is a great idea but the problem with this is that almost every piece of clothing we wear is made in other countries far away. And it will not be so easy for everyone to switch to sustainable clothing since everyone tends to buy things that are affordable and stylish. A sustainable clothing company would not be able to compete against the other titans of the clothing industry since their clothing will cost more since it is not made of easily available materials. Another problem with this is that people find it easier to buy clothes containing polyester or spandex since they are used in clothes made for excercise. people  would not buy the sustainable option if it was not affordable and comfortable along with being a good material for excercising in some cases. The idea is good especially considering how if we switch to locally made sustainable clothing, it will also reduce some CO2 emissions since some CO2 is released when the clothing is shipped to where it n eeds to go. It is sort of like killing two birds with one stone; we reduce the microplastics found in clothes and we also reduce some CO2 emissions.

What are some policies that we can petition for and implement in order to make our cities more ideal yet sustainable? Recently I visited an article that introduced different ideas that help cut down carbon emissions that potentially could be introduced to towns and cities such as adding carbon taxes and encouraging electric vehicles and transportation. However, a specific quote from the sub-title "Make it easier to live without cars" really caught my eye: "But we drive because our streets have been designed for our vehicles, not us." I find that relatively true when we look at cities without things like sidewalks or bike lanes. If we designed our roads to be more accessible for walking and biking, would that make an ideal change to both cut down our cities' carbon footprint as well as bringing a healthier lifestyle by walking/biking?

source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/opi … 776acdc17d

Something we could do in order to change the carbon footprints of the average citizen is make bikes available to rent, making outdoor activities more available, and make a city sponsored garden. These things could add together to make for a more interactive city which would be a cool city to live in.

word

In San Francisco there are hundred of public bus stops and even trains. Since the city is so large and populated people usually just walk, ride bikes, or take the bus. This is heavily reducing the carbon footprint since individuals are using their own cars, instead they take public transport to not only reduce the amount of cars on the road but the carbon footprint of the city as well.

black asphalt traps heat which is a small contributor to climate change, what can we do to prevent this?

Good question. Maybe make the roads out of concrete? That would be a huge investment though. However black asphalt does make nice roads for Thanos Car to drive on!

There has been a movement to cover black tops and roads in lighter concrete or paint to help with the heat in urban areas and cities. I guess they are covering areas in some cities and it has helped with energy and air conditioning demand around the streets they painted.

Renewable energies (hydropower, solar power, wind energy, etc.) could be a sustainable alternative to fossil fuels. Efficiency would be of utmost importance.

Better yet, nuclear energy. It has all the benefits of renewables and more as it produces way more energy.

i disagree because there is a lot of risks when dealing with nuclear materials. It may be a good idea for energy production, but it may also bring really results to the environment if it fails. Chernobyl disaster is one of those instances.

I think that the efficiency is very important because at the moment we don't need more than a half of the energy that we're actually using.
is very important to "use less and use better"

I believe that renewable energies are a good solution for the global warming, particularly the hydroelectric energy, the solar panels or also the wind energy. The combustion of fuels fossils it provokes large CO2 streams, therefore the fuels fossils can be replaced with other sources of energy, the best choice would be the renewable sources The solar rays we have in abundance and the transformation of these in usable energy doesn't provoke polluting emissions, equally also the hydroelectric energy and the wind energy. I believe that use the renewable energies can belong to the solution to the problems of the climatic changes, or at least to reduce his effects.

yes, but renewable energies at the moment doesn't produce  enough energy and so use other kind of  sources is cheaper and more comfortable

For me, the ideal city would be like the city of Amesterdam. This is because in Amsterdam there is a good availability of public transport such as the metro or tram, and above all, there is a good bike path that covers the whole city and surroundings.
However, the factor that makes this city an example for others is the mentality of people, who are more likely to use public transportation or to ride a bike rather than take the car.
In addition the city as much of the nation is powered by clean energy, produced by wind energy and hydroelectric energy.

I agree with you, but I have to say that Amsterdam is not the only city that is ecological. For example, also Copenhagen is a very green city (according to the Global Green Economy Index 2016, Copenhagen is the most ecological city in all the earth planet). In fact: the public transport system is well developed, the cars are few and every day more than 1 million km are traveled by bike; one food store in ten sells organic food; It is also an example for sustainable construction, as confirmed by the complex of Orestad City, a few kilometers from the capital, built in less than a decade.
I think that more cities like Amsterdam or Copenhagen will be the next future if the Humanity really want to survive and "save" the planet. But is correct to say that kind of cities like that are possible because of the morphology of the territory and because of the open mind of the population of the cities.

I'm not totally agree with you, because even cities that have gradients if they want and if they are incentivized to change would be able to find a solution to be more environmentally friendly. For example, they could increase parking prices and reduce their number so as to encourage people to use public transport, or they could make electric bikes available.

The world is increasingly urbanized.  The urban population has practically doubled in the last 20 years. For this reason, I think it is better to invest now in large cities and megalopolis. Indeed, large cities offer enormous possibilities to reduce pollution and to modify the global impact. I have read that some organization, like the WWF, give awards to cities who develop the best programs to make the future more renewable and livable.

Yes, I agree with you and I think you're right. Urbanization and the consequent growth of large cities are growing more and more nowadays. At school we have learned that this process began at the beginning of the twentieth century thanks to the development of industries in large cities. In the meantime, pollution and other negative consequences for the environment are also increasing thanks to the phenomenon of urbanization. According to a study by ISPRA (Institute for Environmental Protection and Research in Italy), the soil consumed from the 1950s to the present day amounts to 7% of the Italian surface area. Considering that the towns are one of the main causes of pollution, I believe it is appropriate to intervene primarily in large cities. I've heard about the initiatives of the WWF too, and I think that is a great idea. Today there is a big amount of   “sustainable city projects” which are presenting different solutions. An interesting example could be the “CityTree” designed by a Berlin start-up. It is a tree that would have the ability to filter the air. On the on e hand, this project could reduce pollution, on the other hand it would also partly solve the problem of the lack of green spaces in cities.

Yes, I agree with both of you, but I believe that the criterion for a completely ecological city should not be the size of this city, but the fact that it uses 100% renewable technologies. Is it worse to live in a small town without renewable resources or in a big town with all renewable resource?

A week ago I went to Paris for the weekend, it’s a really beautiful city.
Talking about sustainablility, I was positively surprised when I saw that in the city center, there were a lot of bikes, electric bikes, electric scooters and so many pedestrian streets.
Along the Seine, there is a long pedestrian street where people go walking, running and go by bike; once this street was open to traffic, but then they decided to close it and make it an amazing way to stroll thru the city without polluting the environment.
During my three days there I never took a taxi, because it was so easy to go around with a bike or an electric scooter! And if I had to reach a further place, I took public transportation because they are very well organized.
Even from the airport there is no need to take a taxi, because under the airport there is the train line which is connected to the city center: it’s so much cheaper than a taxi, and it’s also easy to take.
In big cities I find it rea lly important to embrace public transportation, public bikes and other means of transport that do not consume petrol, like electric scooter (which I used a lot).

Hi, I've never been to Paris but I think this would be the perfect example for all the big cities in the world and it could reduce a lot the CO2 emissions. It could turn the world into a better place again, because the CO2 that we produce is destroying the climate and causing problems to the nature and to the oceans.

That's amazing!
I've been in Vienna for almost a month this summer and I noticed quite the same as you did. Most of the people move by using a bike/e-bike, that are really cheap (the first hour is gratis and the second is like 1 euro) and every street is done to have both pedestrians and bikers. By doing so it is not just ecofriendly but also much safer (where I live if you want to go by bike you must go in the street together with cars and it isn't always a good idea..). Also, if you have to travel more, you can choose between subways -that bring you everywhere really fast-, trams, buses or trains. Vienna is obviously a big city so it is normal to see lots of cars, but I wonder how would it be if there were no public transport..!
It is wonderful to hear that always more cities are going green

Do you know that an estimated 4 billion Starbucks cups end up in landfills each year because they can not be recycled or composted?
One month ago I went to New York (I live in Switzerland) and I have noticed a Cafe called “Think Coffee” that have compostable cups.
Think Coffee has a Social Project Coffee, here you can find all the information: https://www.socialprojectcoffee.com they have created this project because they know that it is a challenge to understand if your purchasing decisions make a positive impact in the world.  Social Project Coffee is based on the idea that it is the efforts they make every day to help farm workers or their communities that make the biggest difference.  On their website you can see where your dollars go & how your purchase supports real projects at origin that help farm workers or their communities. You can support projects like housing reconstruction in Colombia, feminine hygiene in Ethiopia or clean water access in Nicaragua.  I think it is important to choose where you buy drinks and food, you can make the difference.
[IMG_8325](//muut.com/u/footprint/s3/:footprint:ejRp:img_8325.jpg.jpg)

The dream city of almost everybody would be sustainable. The carbon footprint would be a number that would not hurt the environment but build it up. The city would look like the future is described in movies, fashionable designs and people would defiantly want to live there.

the city would look clean and a lot of people would be riding bikes you would rarely see cars on the streets. it would make me want to live there more because it would be nice and refreshing being away from all the cars that cause it.

One thing that can make a city more sustainable would be to ride a bike or just walking to get to places. You not only get exercise when you do that, but you also don't have to waste gas/ fuel.

That most people use cars in cities then walk or ride a bike.

Many people use their cars for transportation even if it would be better to walk or ride a bike, both of which save money and are more environmentally friendly.

lots of public transportation like buses and lots bike lanes. Carpool lines encouraged.

I believe that people should take more public transportation and I feel thats the best way for now to reduce everyones carbon footprint. We need to stop deforestation and plant more trees to reduce the C02 in the atmosphere. I will be better on my water usage because I use a lot of water and take longer showers, to fix this I will take shorter ones and turn the water off when I brush my teeth.

I agree that you should conserve as much as you can to help our society.

I think we should all conserve to a limit.

I agree that we should conserve energy by turning off lights when we are not using them.

I agree that we should conserve energy by turning off things and appliances that u don''t use

I agree. I think that if more people used public transportation that would reduce many peoples carbon footprint. I use public transportation five times a week after school,  but I believe that I could use it more to create less co2 and reduce my footprint. I also think that if I watched my water usage more it could reduce my footprint. I rarely think about this but I could fix it with small simple changes in my daily life. I could do this by also taking shorter showers and turning off faucets when they aren't in use.

My sustainable city would survive around the five R's, refuse, reuse, reduce, recycle, and rot. We refuse disposable plastic whenever and wherever possible. We will reduce any excessive packaging reuse containers and cups that cannot be recycled. Any materials that can be recycled will be turned into new things. Any food scraps and paper will be composted and rot. With that compost can grow new crops. Every house will be solar powered and we will have wind mills on the outskirts of town.

I agree but will people use to get around

That is a factor I did not think about. We can have buses that go around the city fueled by salt water! There was an article I read on BBC. I will encourage electric cars and will only allow cars with a gas milage over 50 m/g.

I think that that 5 R's are a good idea. Refuse is an interesting concept, I think it will help reduce the carbon level a lot, by simply saying no to a plastic straw. Reuse helps a lot when it comes to reusing your own bags at a grocery store instead of buying plastic and paper bags which are bad for the environment. Reducing plastic bags will help lower the amount of landfill being put into the ocean and hurting the animals and plants. Recycling helps because the item you recycled can be used again in another way. Rotting food might not be the best way to get rid of waste because a lot of food cannot be composted and will effect the compost used to create new crops.

I agree with your idea of this sustainable city. The 5 R's would help many become more aware of what they are using daily. Thank you for sharing your ideas

The five R's are a great model for an independent person's sustainability efforts, but I have to wonder how they would work on a large scale. The list would probably have to be modified so that, in this ideal city, there would be no need for individual citizens to Refuse plastic, because the city as a whole would be refusing. This could look like a ban on plastics, or maybe a rating system for the sustainability of businesses.

We rely on plastic for a lot. How will we replace everything?

You're correct, lyd, as a society we use plastic for many, many things, some of which cannot be avoided (such as medical supplies). However, it is important to remember that plastic was only invented in the 1900's. Using plastic the way we do is a relatively new phenomenon. In fact, plastic has only been popular since the 1950's, when Tupperware launched it's nationwide marketing campaign for its sealable containers. Imagine that! We used to function without plastic only 70 years ago! This means that there are ways to do things sans plastic, specifically when it comes to the way we buy food and household objects like furniture, toys, and containers. Some of the materials that can be used to replace plastic include glass, stainless steel, aluminum, paper, cloth, and wood. Buy buying food in bulk quantities, or only fresh from farmers, the need for plastic is eliminated.  As for the plastics that are necessary for our everyday lives, there need not be more plastic created to suit our needs. Instead, we could tap into the huge amount of plastic waste that is already in our  world- in the oceans and in the recycling system. A company called Parley is currently creating new things from old plastic. The group recently partnered with Adidas and made some pretty sweet looking clothes... If you're interested you can check it out here: https://www.adidas.com/us/parley?grid=t … Y-PRODUCTS

Some other resources that you may find helpful in learning about reusing/ decreasing use of plastic are linked below:
https://preciousplastic.com/en/index.html
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgjw6t … w/featured
https://www.youtube.com/user/ZeroWasteHome
https://www.amazon.com/Plastic-Purge-Be … 1250029392
https://www.amazon.com/Green-Enough-Cle … 1623367603

I hope this helps! Feel free to reply with any questions or things you need any clarification on!

I agree, swales could reduce flooding in areas with high flood rates and reduce runoff from the streets

The best city is one that can sustain its self, it would use water refinement to reuse water. Most importantly wind and water turbines would power the city, also solar panels would be installed on every house. The main mode of transport would be  electric trains, buses, and E-cars. All plastic would be made out of bio-biodegradable materials. Any process  that requires burning of any sort would use electric heaters.

There would be a lot of people walking and everything in walking distance. Also more city buses so people wouldn't need to drive their own cars and use less fossil fuels. There would be minimal use of electricity as well as heat/AC.

I would like to see your carbon footprint. Im interested in how much you use. Besides that walking and riding bikes along with public transport would definitely reduce the carbon emissions.

with all the new electric public buses, if we used majority of pubic transit, and walking, or other forms of transportation i think that we could easily bring down our energy footprint.

For transportation, I got 4,295 kgs (mainly because my dad and the rest of my family live far away).  I got 2,501 kgs for Home. 1,811 kgs for Food and 227 kgs for purchases. With the exception of transportation, I scored well below the averages for my region.

I wish you would've put a bit more information but its good that you were below average for most

Yes, you were about average but you could describe what you did a little more.

Thats very good that you are below average by so much but I can agree with Hunter and say that maybe just a little more information would be nice, and also how you would maybe try to get even lower.

I did not really know that much based off of what you put but i think u could have done a little more

i think that for most people they do not use a lot of energy, but having transportation be the most energy consumption

ha ha epic!

That is very good. It is quite interesting your transportation alone is larger than the global average.

The city that we would create would be less transportation and better ways to get around. We would also try to conserve more water and use less of it. We need to stop deforestation for careless reasons and save our C02 Levels. It would make me want to live there because it would show people care about the enviroment..

I agree with you conserving water and use less transportation is one of the biggest ways we can decrease CO2 usage. Although we would also have to  encourage locally grown foods over foods from far away.

Aiden, My man, yes we should stop burning fossil fuels and use ones that renewable so that we are not burning fossils that release carbon and pollute the atmosphere

If I were to make a sustainable city I would focus on the means of transportation, generating power, and material production. People would get around by bike, electric cars, and walking. To generate power, my city would use renewable resources such as sunlight, wind, and geothermal energy to power the city. Production of plastic would be reduced and we would work to get our meets and leathers through a process of bioprinting. Altogether, my sustainable city would thrive off of nature's energy and its animals, making the CO2 concentration as little as possible.

I believe that nuclear energy could be the solution to many of the world's energy needs. Although it gets a bad reputation for only two accidents and its relationship to cancer and war, nuclear energy is actually less harmful to humans and the environment than comparable gas or coal plants according to this study: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanc … S0140-6736(07)61253-7/fulltext
With all the harmful pollutants put into the atmosphere by coal, gas, diesel and oil, those fine particles also cause lots, if not more cases of cancer and destruction of the environment because according to the EPA, fine particulates can cause premature death in people with heart or lung disease, nonfatal heart attacks, irregular heartbeat, aggravated asthma, decreased lung function, increased respiratory symptoms (such as irritation of the airways, coughing or difficulty breathing), and much more. What do you guys think?

That's an interesting viewpoint, I didn't think about that. I like that you linked evidence about nuclear energy being less harmful that gas and coal plants. It doesn't surprise me that nuclear energy is more safe than coal and gas, and I do think it is a better alternative.

Very interesting standpoint. I can see what you are talking about on how it releases water vapor which is not bad. But I also believe that the uranium pollutes the ground sometimes and that the two events are just the major events out of hundreds of meltdowns. Besides that its a interesting viewpoint on the matter no less.

I agree that nuclear energy could be a solution to some of the world's energy needs.  Nuclear energy is a good idea but it has some cons as well as pros and I think there is better alternatives to solve the world's energy needs.  According to (https://www.conserve-energy-future.com/ … -energy.ph) pros of Nuclear energy are the low pollution, low operating costs, and it is more proficient than fossil fuels.  We could use it for for another 70-80 years.  Some cons       are that it is not renewable, it has environmental impacts, radio active waste disposal, there could be nuclear accidents, costs a lot, is in a few countries and military is using it to make weapons and the weapons could fall in the wrong hands.   Thats why I think its a good idea for an energy source but I think we could use something else

Everything would be in walking distance which mean more walking, riding a bike, or taking the buss and less people using cars and lessen the use of fossil fuels.

I believe people should take more public transportations as well it will be better for the atmosphere even in a big city like Charlotte.

Yes, less cars means less emmissons.

yes that would lower the average of energy.

My total carbon footprint was 6,040 kgs, transportation result was 1218 kgs, home result was 2538 kgs, food result was 1832 kgs, and purchases result was 452 kgs.

Transportation:
I don't really travel anywhere far during the summer unless it's a special occasion or a one time family visit of the year. My family gets there by driving and we do not own any diesel run vehicles. I get to school and back home by riding the school bus monday through friday.

Home:
It's rare for me to go out to eat; I just cook food at home and I only turn a light on when the day gets very dark. I do not leave or turn the central cooling/heating on unless I am freezing cold or sweating like a sumo wrestler. I never leave lights on in rooms I am not in.

Food:
As I had addressed in the home paragraph, I or my parents usually make my our own food and we rarely go out to eat unless it's a special occasion, vacation trip, someone else's house, or if we don't have any ingredients to make food at home at the time.

Purchases:
I'm not a fan of shopping in stores. I typically buy stuff from online an d only when I need something or if it's for a special occasion.

I had the lowest carbon footprint total out of my class and it was significantly below average compared to my region's averages.

For your home section you save a lot of energy In your house and thats good, keep it up.

I agree with going out to eat less to conserve energy.

Going out to eat less conserves gas and cash so its a really good idea.

I got 1284 kgs for transportation because I don't travel anywhere. I got 4011 kgs for housing.  I got 3965 kgs for food because I have a large family. I got 362 kgs for purchasing because my family tries to budget as much as possible. This all totals up to 9,616 kgs which is nearly 6,000 kgs below my state average

Thats good that your family saves money with the budget and that you don't travel a lot, it  helps out the atmosphere.

It is very good that you budget like Hunter said as well. Also it is good that you use less tansportation.

My sustainable city would have more trees around the entire city so that the carbon dioxide level would be lower and also more oxygen. I would decrease the number of cars and have everyone use public transportation as much as possible to decrease the amount of ground-level ozone which is very bad for the environment. I would also have solar panels as the energy source for the city to help decrease emissions that contribute to global warming.

I agree with you Esmerelda, a sustainable city should have lots of trees to take in the CO2. I also agree with the use of public transportation limiting CO2. The use of all of these items will really help make a city sustainable.

I agree with you Esmerelda.My sustainable city would be more of a green zone on the surface while beneath it there would be roads with electric transportations. On the surface there would be gardens which would raise oxygen level and it would also provide localy raised food. Parks would be all around the city so the kids and adults could spent some time on the fresh air. The city would be building farms of solar panels which would provide the electricity to houses and public buildings. Water which we use for showering would be reused to water the gardens and plants in the yard.

I agree with everything that you have said in this post.  These are all great ideas on ways to reduce carbon footprints of many people in different cities.  My favorite thing that you said is to plant more trees, this is a great idea because oxygen and carbon dioxide levels are very very important.

Alexa S, 15, NC, US

I agree with the city you picture. It is a great example of a healthy city with little pollution going into the earth. I like the idea of public transportation because not enough cities use public transportation.

This city you picture is very good and should be everywhere. The best thing is to plant more trees.

If I had a city, for our industrial buildings we would not pollute a lot. I would not want to burn fossil fuels in my city. We should use solar panels and be kind to the environment. I would want houses to be built close enough to things like school and grocery stores so that hopefully people would walk or bike places instead of running our cars or busses. I would also not let people unnecessarily cut down trees for more houses or stores. I think people would want to live there because it is more environment friendly.

My total carbon footprint was 10,671 kgs. My home was 7,587 kgs, food was 2,501kgs, purchases 257 kgs, and transportation was 326 kgs. I think that is pretty good because it is lower than the average.

If I was to make my own city I would make sure it was always clean.  I would put areas around where you could recycle or reuse items.  Going along with that, I would encourage people to actually recycle and to maybe even reuse clothing, by adding thrift stores.  I would make sure that the electricity and power sources around my city were being controlled by renewable resources.  Some options would include, solar power and/or wind power.  I would make sure that everyone or at least most people would sign up for a day to clean the environment.  People would go around picking up trash and making sure we had plants planted all around.  I would also make sure that everyone would have a tech-free day at least twice a month.  This is so people can enjoy the outside and we could protect our air and water by keeping it from carbon produced by technology.  I would make sure that people had easy access to bikes and buses that they could take to work or school everyday.  Anot her thought would be to make sure we grow our own foods and keep habitats safe with parks and other natural resources.  I would want to make sure everyone had a part in keeping our community clean, healthy, and happy.

Those are good ideas. I like your idea of letting people sign up for a day to clean the environment.

If I were to build a medium sized city, I would have to take the carbon footprint into consideration. I would make it mandatory for buildings to have solar panels that produce at least 20% of the total energy of the buildings. The other 80% of energy would be produced through wind mills. Utility scale wind turbines cost approximately 2 million dollars. Just in case the wind conditions are poor, the city will have a couple of nuclear power plants near by. The housing units and schools will have greenhouses to produce food and plants to take in CO2. My city would have many bike paths. The few roads in the city would be lined with many trees to take in the CO2. In further efforts to lower the CO2 level, my city will have a ban on gas cars. That way, the only cars will be electric. This will cut down on the CO2 level even more. As for public transportation, we will have electric busses. These busses are expensive, the Proterra costs $750,000. Many cities are hesitant to invest in these busses, because they do not want to be the first ones to take the risk of electric busses.  Although they are not common, I would be willing to invest in the electric busses to that my city could have clean air. The center of the city would have a large pond. This pond would take in CO2 and provide fish for the citizens. Having a large pond would allow citizens to fish for food. This would help to assure the consumption of local food. The outer parts of the city would have a few farms. The farms would provide the bulk of the food for the city. As for clothing, we would have shops that have sheep. The sheep wool would be woven into clothing and naturally dyed. I would like to live in this city because I would feel like I would be doing my part in taking care of the Earth. If the city is successful in being sustainable, I would like to reach out to near by cities and try to help them to innovate to be more environmentally friendly.

I like how you would make it mandatory for buildings to have solar panels. It keeps the air cleaner which will help the environment. You have such a thought out plan for your city, and I would live in that city to help the environment.

Now that I know more about my carbon footprint, my sustainable city will be based off of a more environmentally friendly standard. Most of the buildings that could, would be powered by solar panels. A bike system would be introduced to keep people healthy and keep the air cleaner. I would put basically the stuff like schools, sports fields, and stores together so the people that use cars wouldn't have so far to go and I would also offer electric cars. In my city I would also like the food to be grown instead of genetically modified and industrial companies would have enhancements that reduce air and water pollution.

I think that's a great idea. I love how you have several different alternatives to help the environment and to make it a better, cleaner place.

My total carbon footprint was 12,733. For transportation I got 2,447. For home I got 4,656. For food I got 5,432 . For purchases I got 289. I go to school everyday on the bus, which is why transportation might be high for me, I also need to drive home from practice. Food we are pretty normal and purchases I feel like are normal too.

My total carbon footprint was 19,889. For transportation I got 9,816. For home I got 7,070. For food I got 2,443. For purchases I got 540. I got to school everyday on the bus, which is why transportation might be high for some people. But then I don't do a lot of after school activities. Food we are pretty normal and purchases I feel like are normal too.

In my city, there would be only electric cars that would not burn any gas to go long distances. Along with this, people would ride bikes to work, not cars. In addition, all houses would only have electricity or solar powered energy so that the stoves, oven, and etc. don't use any gases. I would also have all people have a garden full of fruits and vegetables that would be ready at any moment for the citizens to have. This is my sustainable city.