Suburbs: Good for Global Warming?

People have had a long-running dispute in the comments section here about whether cities or suburbs are more energy efficient.

Here's Joel Kotkin arguing for the suburbs in the Washington Post.

Have at it.

Comments

[roulette pro]

To deal with global warming, the government needs to immediately plant more trees, and stop cutting them down. It is a major problem they need to deal with. The importance of trees has been understated by "scientists" that truly don't understand the relevance of trees. Don't criticize the importance of the concept until you know all the facts. On top of deforestation, we are polluting the environment. Another contributing factor is modern day energy systems rely on explosion rather than implosion, and this generates heat. Every systems need to be more efficient and work on implosion, so they stay cool. The non-profit energy research organization at http://www.universalsymbiosis.org ( also http://www.genuinewinner.com ) is active in these areas which will help reverse effects of global warming. I suggest everyone also read "Living Energies" by Callum Coats which explains the work of Victor Schauberger and the importance of trees to our planet. Don't rely on information from the authorities as their advisors don't fully understand the life cycle of the planet. We need to push the authorities to develop forest management and sustainability plans, and this will solve at least part of the problem.

[Viagra Online]

cities definitely, due it's industries.