People Who Live In Suburbs: Classy, Icky, or Dudes?

so what are we arguing now -- are suburbs ok then?

no

*burns Alfred's condo down*

probably not gd but those sensibly planned, enviro friendly sustainable communities are the exception and not the norm in america, regardless of how much greenhouse gas your sister or cousin or whoever is saving

*burns Alfred's condo down*

I'd prefer it if you burned Mr. Cheney's condo, Mr. Secretary.

sorry, got lost on the way

probably not gd but those sensibly planned, enviro friendly sustainable communities are the exception and not the norm in america, regardless of how much greenhouse gas your sister or cousin or whoever is saving

yeah uh no shit? so the underlying beef here is that when given the limited "choice" of suburb, rural area, small town, city, people shouldn't be choosing what they feel is the only viable option among far-from-ideal ones, because it's dooming the planet?

I dunno GD afaict your main argument on this thread is "my sister lives in this cool place so nyah nyah nyah"

well then you're a complete moron, don't know what to tell ya broskilov

people should be making choices that have the environmental costs already factored into the price

the only viable option

That is just not...

anytime anyone ever gets you to try to expand on your point or clarify your argument, you make some snide deflecting comment, don't really know why you bother to interact at all
xp

I...you...are you looking in a MIRROR when you say that???

Laurel, what are the 3 words that preceded those?

Who ARE you? You're like the Dr Morbius of this thread!

This is more about the fact that they come from Asia, than it is about where they're headed. It's still more efficient to import containers to West Coast ports and take them to the middle of the country or even the East Coast by rail, than it is for Asian goods to reach an East Coast port.

But the effect is what's important. And our poor air quality in Los Angeles is basically subsidizing someone else's good air quality so they can buy a bunch of Chinese stuff at walmart. My point is just that it's way more complex than simply "suburbs bad, cities good."

And I don't even really know what a suburb is for the sake of this discussion. I grew up in what I would consider to be the archetypal suburban sprawl (although actually the 10th largest city in the US) and now I live in a suburb or maybe an "exurb" outside of los angeles, but it's 15 minutes away from some decent density. Which to me is pretty different than living "downtown" in a place like say Portland.

where do you live in la?

granny dainger likes basketball

And our poor air quality in Los Angeles is basically subsidizing someone else's good air quality so they can buy a bunch of Chinese stuff at walmart.

As someone who imports a ton of shit through LB and Seattle ports, I'm v curious about this. Are ships waiting to dock/docking/unloading/reloading major contributors to local pollution? Relative to normal automobile use?

yeah! i was under impression from the commentary track on Roger Rabbit that the reason LA's air is so bad was a conspiracy to destroy the public transit infrastructure -- but you're saying all the pollution is from being a shipping hub?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Los_Angeles#Environment

I think what happens is giant cargo ships filled with concentrated polluted air from china sail to LA, dock in the harbor, and then using a fleet of helicopters fan all of that air directly over LA

where do you live in la?

in an unincorporated, hilly part of LA county. would rather not say specifically

http://www.nrdc.org/air/pollution/ports/images/exec1.gif
http://www.nrdc.org/air/pollution/ports/execsum.asp

WOOOOOWWWWWW I had no idea! How is this being assessed, is this emissions from the container ships themselves, plus...whatever forklifts and vehicles maneuver the cargo on and off of ships and into storage areas?

Sorry sorry, reading the wiki now.

do have to tip my cap to dayo for continuing the proud internet tradition of reading innocuous posts in a way that paints the poster in the most unfavorable light possible kiu

How is this being assessed, is this emissions from the container ships themselves, plus...whatever forklifts and vehicles maneuver the cargo on and off of ships and into storage areas?

the way I understand it, it's mostly from the ships sitting there idling offshore while waiting to get a spot in the port. something like that. and the stuff they burn is super dirty.

wk, was mostly curious where you lived w/r/t your earlier question -

there's not an easy answer for LA suburb vs. elsewhere cause the energy and resources you're using depend on your lifestyle not just on where you live. everything else being equal, the basic day-to-day life of someone in a dense area is gonna require less energy than in a suburb. but NY and LA aren't at all the same places, and 'suburbs' half hour outside of them can really mean a variety of things. suburban sprawl of southern california has a leg up on the rest of the country because it's actually pretty dense, there's less weather-dependent energy use and the people who live there actually stopped enjoying driving a while ago, so mass-transit is finally making inroads.

dayo my apartment(s) have been in both minneapolis and saint paul (so twin cities mn), my suburb is an inner ring suburb of saint paul

noted accurate source of info wikipedia says 7024 per square mile - please note that several sources dispute that due to the hardcore green space movement that has always existed in mpls, also the fact that we have a shit ton of rivers and lakes occupying lots of space in the city limits, and it is hard to live on a lake.

the energy and resources you're using depend on your lifestyle not just on where you live. ... 'suburbs' half hour outside of them can really mean a variety of things.

this is exactly the point I was trying to make

nevertheless, container shipping moves a *lot* of stuff and is far more efficient than flying or trucking. sorry long beach

It all ends up on trucks though anyway right? So the chinese goods you buy in the suburbs of Long Beach have a somewhat lower environmental impact than buying those same items in Texas.

I mean, lots of it moves from the port on trains of course too, but all of it ends up on a truck eventually.

yes, but if you walk to the store in texas vs. driving two hours to the store in la (etc. etc.)

basically what I'm saying is that the most environmentally righteous place to live is next door to a walmart in San Pedro.

yes, but if you walk to the store in texas vs. driving two hours to the store in la (etc. etc.)

ok, if then... what? my point is that I think it's tough to make a clear conclusion about that by looking only at one factor in isolation. For example what if I drive 5 miles to the supermarket once a week and only buy locally sourced produce, vs somebody who walks to the supermarket but buys all imported produce?

It all ends up on trucks though anyway right? So the chinese goods you buy in the suburbs of Long Beach have a somewhat lower environmental impact than buying those same items in Texas.

Haha. Well, mine go to Chicago by train. But from Chicago to Indiana, and then to the eventual customers, yes, it's all by truck.

http://pedestrianobservations.wordpress.com/2011/07/20/quick-note-on-food-transportation/

I mean you can't BUY them in LB without them first going to a central warehouse/processing location, and then back out to distributors etc. So hypothetically living IN Long Beach would be the MOST wasteful of all scenarios, because the product is 100% doubling its travels.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wzz2DynBKI

I'm counting on methane digsters to soften my carnivorous footprint by recouping some of the stored energy from day-to-day manure disposal and from the fat and waste parts of the animal after slaughter.

http://pedestrianobservations.wordpress.com/2011/07/20/quick-note-on-food-transportation/

interesting, but the conclusion seems to be that you should consider the environmental impact of what you eat over where it came from. which I think again ties into my main point that "it's complicated."

obviously dense development is more environmentally friendly than sprawl and we should all reduce our reliance on cars as much as possible. but to leap from that to "people who live in suburbs are icky" or "conservative" ignores a lot of the nuances.

that graph still blowing my mind. feel like they should string up extension cords to the ships or something.

I mean, as much as you want to isolate one factor, it's pretty hard. for one, you'd have to come up w/ a basket of goods that they'd be buying. also are we talking about just the environmental effects within america, or worldwide?

otoh looking at things from a macro-level is a lot more clearcut - a population in a dense city is going to require less energy than an otherwise comparable population in a suburb. that doesn't mean that everyone in manhattan has a better carbon footprint than everyone on long island - there are incredibly wealth people in manhattan, they take a lot of planes, they consume a lot, etc. etc. but when it comes to comparable measures - 'how much energy do they consume getting to work?' - it's not even a question.

what are the nuances involved in people moving to the suburbs

I mean you can't BUY them in LB without them first going to a central warehouse/processing location, and then back out to distributors etc. So hypothetically living IN Long Beach would be the MOST wasteful of all scenarios, because the product is 100% doubling its travels.

you're shattering my illusion of some kind of waterfront farmer's market where you can browse the melamine dog food and lead-painted toys fresh off the boat while listening to a busking Mike Watt singing sea shanties.

obviously dense development is more environmentally friendly than sprawl and we should all reduce our reliance on cars as much as possible. but to leap from that to "people who live in suburbs are icky" or "conservative" ignores a lot of the nuances.

never said icky, and 'conservative', well, read my original quote. I said that people who, given an everything-else-equal choice (price, schools, commute) would prefer to live in a suburban area than an urban area are likely to overall lean conservative. that's all I said.

but people generally don't get to make that decision because of the way we fund schools and only have a few walkable cities in the entire country

the twin cities seem like a pretty cool place from google maps