Green Metropolis: What the City Can Teach the Country About True Sustainability by David Owen

Jan 10, 2010

Shira rated it

Overall, I found this book repetitive and not all that interesting. The author tended to ramble a lot and tell somewhat irrelevant anecdotes to somehow illustrate a larger point. His tone was a bit arrogant, and he seemed to go out of his way to insult most issues that environmentalists hold dear. He had a point in many of those cases, but it was hard to get around his obnoxious tone.

What bugged me the most was his hypocrisy. He said that the most sustainable way for us to liv...more

like 2 likes

· see review

Jan 15, 2012

Emily Albarillo rated it

Shelves: 2012, ebooks, library-books, nonfiction, men-authors

I really enjoyed this book - it's an intriguing line of reasoning that old-style mixed-used cities with dense populations are actually inherently easier on the environment (per capita) than sprawling suburban/rural development.

The author also explains some basic energy issues (where does gas come from? What do we make out of oil? How much oil is there?) and makes some interesting points about people's environmental assumptions - for example, about the locavore food movement (local foo...more

like

· see review

Nov 17, 2011

John Stevenson rated it

· review of another edition

In the last 2 chapters or so, Owen seems to really revel in his polemics and keeps tacking on opinions which run contrary to typical environmental creed. Unfortunately many of these are badly supported or not supported at all. He pretty much completely avoids the psychological implications of not living near nature. He references "Last Child in the Woods" by Richard Louv and dismisses its thesis as nostalgic in about two sentences. Yes, we all can't live in a cabin in the woods, be...more

like

· see review

Oct 07, 2011

Clint Kuipers rated it

Cars are the problem; High densities are the solution

The author makes a well reasoned and nicely researched argument for why places like New York City are some of the “greenest” places to live. The key to NYC’s greenness is that the population is not dependent upon personal transportation (cars) to move from place to place. Using public transportation, walking, and bicycling have largely replaced individual cars. The cause of this change is not large scale personal decisions...more

like

· see review

May 17, 2011

Ben rated it

· review of another edition

This book is terrible. The premise is alright although no where near as revolutionary as Owen would lead you to believe, but the book is terrible.

The premise is that cities with a high population density are better for the environment than suburbs. People in cities use less space and less energy. Again, this isn't revolutionary. Years ago, I spent a semester in grad school looking at ways of increasing population density. The author makes it seem like all environmentalists hate citie...moreThis book is terrible. The premise is alright although no where near as revolutionary as Owen would lead you to believe, but the book is terrible.

The premise is that cities with a high population density are better for the environment than suburbs. People in cities use less space and less energy. Again, this isn't revolutionary. Years ago, I spent a semester in grad school looking at ways of increasing population density. The author makes it seem like all environmentalists hate cities, which sets him up as the sole prophet of population density, but he never differentiates between environmentalists and naturalists. Jefferson, Muir and the others were naturalists. They may have also been environmentalists but there is a difference. I feel like most environmentalists live in cities these days. Other than the premise, there were maybe 30 pages of useful, interesting information. I didn't know that people who get more fuel efficient drive more so higher fuel efficiency standards are basically a wash environmentally.

The author starts out on the wrong foot by focusing completely on New York City. NYC can be a good example in terms of public transportation and not using cars, but it's not the most densely populated city in the US, much less the world. "The problem we face is how to make other settled places more like Manhattan, whose residents currently come closer than any other Americans to meeting environmental goals that all of us, eventually, will have to come to terms with." So even if you've tried really hard to be environmental, built a net-zero home, biked to work, recycled, give up, you're not as environmentally responsible as the former Wall Street Exec who tired of rush hour traffic and decided to hire a helicopter to get him to and from work everyday (Too Big to Fail)... I feel like I don't even need to argue that because it's so pointless.

The other thing that really bothered me, and just got worse and worse the deeper into the book I got, is the author's extreme hypocrisy. He lives in a small town in Conneticut. He drives everywhere. He argues to make driving more difficult so people will do it less, yet when he has a chance to take the train into NYC, he drives. He addresses this hypocrisy in a paragraph or two in the last ten pages. He says that if he and his wife moved back to NYC, someone would buy his conneticut home and live in it and buy his car and drive it, so it's better that he and his wife are there because they both work at home. The hypothetical buyers of their house wouldn't work from home, of course they also might not drive their car to walk their dogs, which the author admits to doing. Since he's remained in his home, the hypothetical buyers have had to build a new home in small town Conneticut, and buy a new car and drive it. It's obviously better to have two families living in Conneticut and driving everywhere than one living in Conneticut and one living in NYC. The author admits to not even doing the small steps to reduce his energy use like adding insulation or moving his third floor office to the second floor. The price of gas dropped again, and even though he writes about how it's just going to go up and up, he lost his motivation to make an impact. It's the economy's fault, not his. Why did he even write the book? His attitude is that he can't make a difference, it's up to the government. I really, really hope not too many other people have that attitude because why would we even try?

Some lesser issues that I had with this book... LEED doesn't meet the author's high standards. Noone claims it's a perfect program. The author complains about the alternative fuel parking spots credit and brags about questioning it at a conference. The entire book is about density and he doesn't even mention the density credit. Also, towards the end, he says "environmentalists tend to focus on defending the places where people aren't rather than on intelligently organizing the places where people are" which is the whole point of LEED. Mies van der Rohe doesn't live up to the author's expectations which didn't sit well with me. The author complains about the local food movement. By his calculation, the blueberries that travel from California came in a truck full of blueberries reducing the embodied energy per blueberry while the blueberries at the farmer's market he has to drive 30 miles each way to cost a lot more energy-wise. He's missing the whole point of his entire book. If I walk to any of the three farmer's markets within a mile from my apartment, I can buy blueberries with almost no expenditure of energy.

I could go on, but I'll stop. I'll leave it at this, this book is terrible.(less)

like 1 like

· see review

Apr 22, 2011

Rebecca T Marsh rated it

This is a very though-provoking, inspiring book. It talks about how we already have the solutions for sustainable living, and it has nothing to do with ethanol, solar panels nor battery run cars! Living close together in real urban cities is the best way to live sustainably, it's not rocket science, and humans have known how to build and live like this for most of our history. This is not the industrial era that made city-living despicable and unhealthy; today city-life is enjoyable, sustaina...more

like

· see review

Mar 20, 2011

Stevie rated it

Shelves: science

Fantastic read! This book really changed the way I think about sustainability, urban living and environmentalism. It also lays out the information in an easy-to-digest way. Besides being a little repetitive in some places, it was extremely well-written. The author does a good job of including both research on larger-scope issues and bit of personal experience. He contrasts his current life in suburban Connecticut with his former life in Manhattan, and he lays out all the reasons his urban life w...more

like

· see review

Nov 13, 2010

David rated it

Shelves: economics, nonfiction

I enjoyed this book very much. It surely turned my thinking about our living environment upside down. The book has thoroughly convinced me that dense cities with good infrastructure are the best solution to our long-term environmental problems. Densely packed buildings for living and working do save on most of our resources; fuel, heat, electricity, water

So, why doesn't the author move from his rural home back to the city? Owen addresses this question at the end of the book. He writes...more

like 2 likes

· see review

Aug 25, 2010

Brenda Pike rated it

Green Metropolis by David Owen gets the biggest compliment I can give a book: I wish I had written it myself. It’s a wonderfully clear explanation of why high-density, mixed-use cities like New York and Boston are more environmentally friendly than suburban or even rural communities.

It seems counterintuitive at first—and you get the sense that the author enjoys being contrarian—but the analysis is compelling. And while I would like more information on how some of the statistics he qu...moreGreen Metropolis by David Owen gets the biggest compliment I can give a book: I wish I had written it myself. It’s a wonderfully clear explanation of why high-density, mixed-use cities like New York and Boston are more environmentally friendly than suburban or even rural communities.

It seems counterintuitive at first—and you get the sense that the author enjoys being contrarian—but the analysis is compelling. And while I would like more information on how some of the statistics he quotes were gathered, they’re staggering. New Yorkers are collectively responsible for 1% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, but they represent 2.7% of the population. This is worth repeating: 2.7% of the population is responsible for just 1% of the greenhouse gas emissions because they live in the city.

How do they manage this?

By living in such close proximity to everything they need that they walk, bike, and use public transportation, rather than drive
By living in smaller spaces that are easier to heat and cool

Although environmentalism isn’t generally associated with cities, Owen points out that the best way to preserve open spaces is for people to move closer together, not farther apart: “Wild landscapes are less often destroyed by people who despise wild landscapes than by people who love them…by people who move to be near them, and then, when others follow, move again.”

If the residents of New York were to all live at the density of the author’s hometown (around 4,000 residents in 38.7 square miles), “they would require a space equivalent to the land area of the six New England states plus Delaware and New Jersey.” Considering that, us Boston residents are actually doing my Maine relatives a favor by not crowding them out of their towns!

Of course, as Owen points out, the three cities with the highest transit use, New York, San Francisco, and Boston, didn’t get that way because of good urban planning, but because they’re on an island and peninsulas, thus inhibiting outward growth. The real question is how to preserve that unintentional result and duplicate it in places that already have a very different plan.(less)

like

· see review

Nov 27, 2009

Catherine Siemann rated it

A book to make New Yorkers feel good about themselves -- our undersized, overpriced apartments mean we are at the cutting edge of sustainability. At times reading book was frustrating: locavorism, smaller cars with higher gas mileage, alternative energy sources -- according to Owen these mean little, unless the majority of the country changes the way they live. As a New Yorker, I happen to like my pedestrian, minimalist lifestyle, but most Americans seem to prefer their big houses and their S...more

like

· see review

May 05, 2010

Emily rated it

Shelves: 2010, on-shelf-at-library-so-why-not

This book tries to make a surprising argument: the ultra-urban lifestyle of New York City is more environmentally sustainable than living in the suburbs or the country. But is that actually surprising? It seemed a little obvious to me. The author's point is that there is no lifestyle choice more significant to the environment than how much you drive. If you choose a lifestyle that involves a lot of driving, it doesn't matter how much you recycle or choose bamboo flooring or switch to a hybrid ca...more

like 2 likes

· see review

Nov 12, 2010

Heather Denkmire rated it

I wish I could say I "really liked" this because I did really (really, really, really!) like learning that living in cities can be and frequently is better for the environment than living out in the country. I prefer city living (and I don't mean Portland (Maine) which I consider a large town) and "getting away" to the country. Because I was under the misconception that city living was necessarily irresponsible in an environmental way there was always a little niggling bit of...more

like

· see review

May 10, 2010

Rebecca Mordini rated it

Just when you thought there was nothing new in environmental thinking, David Owen comes along with a new perspective- what if cities were the solution, not the problem to our environmental woes?
With humor and research, Owen, shoots down some of the environmental movements sacred cows and takes some wind out of the sails of some of its heroes. For example, how green is Amory Lovins' Rocky Mountain Institute? Sure it is built with the latest green products and runs on solar energy- but how ...more

like

· see review

Apr 07, 2011

Bob Schmitz rated it

David Owen makes a convincing case for the idea that Manhattan (and other densely populated cities) are the greenest place in the US. Certainly the energy usage and pollution in NYC is greater per area than for instance a rural New England town but it has 1/3 the energy consumption per person. He points out that in any calculation of the environmental impact of any "green" technology you must include all of the outcomes of the use of that technology. For instance a "green" ...moreDavid Owen makes a convincing case for the idea that Manhattan (and other densely populated cities) are the greenest place in the US. Certainly the energy usage and pollution in NYC is greater per area than for instance a rural New England town but it has 1/3 the energy consumption per person. He points out that in any calculation of the environmental impact of any "green" technology you must include all of the outcomes of the use of that technology. For instance a "green" home with the latest in solar panels, water recycling, renewable building material etc. is not really so green if it is in a suburb where all shopping, playing, going to work involves driving or where it is big enough that it has storage for and thus encourages the purchase to tons of "stuff" that needs to be manufactured, shipped etc. In Manhattan living spaces are small and people uses elevators, side walks, buses and subways to travel and mostly don't have cars a much more efficient way to live regardless of whether they heat their homes with coal. "Green" business campuses which are all the rage often have huge parking lots to accomodate all the required cars that people use to get to work.

Owens shines a new light (new to me at least) on the skewed motivations and actions of city planners, architects, traffic engineers, environmentalists in their efforts to make the world greener. The terrible traffic in NYC is a positive thing environmentally as it encourages, forces, people to live closer to work and shopping etc, and thus is green. Encouraging congestion with narrower streets, street side parking etc. are green moves. The size of Central Park in "ungreen" as it encourages people to take a taxi around rather than walk the few blocks across it. Zoning whereby commercial and residential areas are widely separated has been a major component of energy use as people are forced to live car rides from their work, shopping and recreation. The surprising list goes on and on.

Owen points out the encouraging people to conserve energy because it's the right thing to do has not and will not work. Economically and physically structuring our world so that conservation is necessary has and will work.

My one "what what can we do" take was that significantly higher taxes on gas will be essentially a transfer of wealth from Mideast potentates to US cities, states and governments and will result in major reductions in oil usage.

Interestingly I talked to my 24 yo daughter about this book and she had learned many of the ideas in college while majoring in Latin American Studies. I was surprised and pleased.(less)

like

· see review

Dec 13, 2010

Jocelyn rated it

Shelves: 2010-booklist

This book should be subtitled, "Why living in New York City is awesome."

The problem I have with this book is that the author has so many citations and bases his discussion in fact, then argues his opinion on top of it. Why should I believe him over experts? He makes valid points, but offers no alternative solutions and seems to poo-poo lots of environmental efforts. If the common environmentalist doesn't consider the whole picture as he tends to argue, then how can I be so...more

like 3 likes

· see review

Apr 18, 2010

Desiree rated it

I really enjoyed this book! Having recently moved from a single family house that was poorly insulated into a smaller high rise, where you never even need to turn on the heat, it made a lot of sense to me. However, my moving here displaced someone else, so were there really any gains in sustainability? I've lived in NYC and Boston, both cities rank high on the green index, with NYC using the least amount of energy per capita. As energy prices rise, green building is going to be more affordable a...more

like

· see review

Apr 25, 2010

Keith rated it

There was enough of interest in this book to keep me reading all the way to the end, but there were a lot of annoyances along the way. The book was also poorly organized. It appears to be little more than an anthology of Owen's articles from The New Yorker. But rather than actually publishing it as an anthology, Owen tried to patch them together into one cohesive book. The result is a patchwork full of interesting digressions that are poorly melded with the central argument of the book.
...moreThere was enough of interest in this book to keep me reading all the way to the end, but there were a lot of annoyances along the way. The book was also poorly organized. It appears to be little more than an anthology of Owen's articles from The New Yorker. But rather than actually publishing it as an anthology, Owen tried to patch them together into one cohesive book. The result is a patchwork full of interesting digressions that are poorly melded with the central argument of the book.

The argument of the book is interesting and straight-forward. Dense urban areas are more energy efficient than the typical suburban lifestyle. City dwellings are smaller (and thus need less heating, cooling, and lighting). City residents drive less, since urban density makes mass transit and walking/biking more practical. And large urban buildings are more efficient to heat and cool (per resident) than the smaller building of suburbia. Thus, Owen argues, if you care about climate change or other political and environmental costs of our fossil-fuel-dependent life style, big cities are a good thing, and we should do things to encourage more people to live in cities (or, conversely, to make suburban living less enticing).

From this basic point, Owen makes some interesting inferences. If a city dweller has 25% of the carbon footprint of a car-dependent suburban resident, then anything that makes cities more enticing is good for the environment. So investing in city schools is good for the environment, since one of the reasons young families leave the city is often concern about the quality of public education.

Owen spends a lot of the book critiquing things---from trendy environmental movements, such as locavorism and sustainability, to the goals of city and town planners and traffic engineers. Maybe it's good to eat locally grown produce, but if everybody in a major city tried to live that way, they would all starve---there wouldn't be enough locally grown food to feed that many people. Similarly, a family that spent millions of dollars building an 8,000 square foot house to be as eco-friendly as possible are derided for not realizing that it would have been much more eco-friendly to simply build a smaller house, or to move to an apartment in the city.

My frustrations with the book come from many of these critiques (as well as the author's own suggestions). Often he is clever and points out things that make you say, "Gosh, I never thought of it that way." But at the same time, he often makes sloppy arguments and never seems to apply the same skepticism to his own viewpoints that he applies to everyone else's. For example, Owen states that zoning is bad, because zoning laws often enforce rules that make it harder to achieve the population densities you see in urban cores. But he never explains why zoning per se is bad, rather than specific types of zoning ordinances. This is probably because Owen does not actually mean that the mere existence of any sort of zoning law is necessarily a bad thing.

All in all, I would have found this book better if the author were as honest and forthright about the shortcomings of his lifestyle and ideas as he is about everyone else's. Owen admits that he does not follow the lifestyle he advocates, living instead in suburban Connecticut. He tries to argue that he is not being hypocritical by observing that if he didn't live in his Connecticut home, somebody else would; so there would be the same environmental impact either way. I found this a completely unsatisfying rationalization. If more people, like himself, wanted to live in cities, and did so, there would be more aggregate demand for urban dwellings, and, over time, cities would grow. If Owen had admitted that he is an example of the challenge we face---that most people prefer the luxuries, flexibility, and prestige of our sub-urban lifestyle and aren't willing to give up these comforts for intangible environmental benefits---he would have been more honest, and he would have gotten at some of the real underlying challenge of trying to reign in the waste and inefficiency of a "more-is-better" culture.

In the end, Owen does admit that the problem of how to truly live in a sustainable and environmentally conscious way without giving up the comforts of modern society is quite difficult and that he doesn't know what the solutions are. But at that point it is too little, too late. I had already spent most of the book saying, "It's easy to criticize, Mr. Owen, but I don't see you coming up with any practical suggestions either." I would have been less annoyed, if Owen had made this admission earlier, and been a little more humble in his critiques of everything anyone else has suggested or tried.

I listened to this book on CD, read by Patrick Lawlor. Part of my general annoyance with the book was the slightly sneering and superior tone Lawlor brought to the book. Maybe that was Lawlor's take on the book, but it also may have simply been the way Owen's words came across when read out loud.(less)

like 1 like

· see review

Feb 04, 2010

Kristen rated it

Recommends it for: people who think owning a Prius is all they need to do for the planet

Recommended to Kristen by: L

I was not expecting a lot from this book. I expected it to be a bit like The Big Green Apple: Your Guide to Eco-Friendly Living in New York City — a lot of stuff I knew already, told in a snobby, preachy tone — but Green Metropolis was an excellent examination of why cities are more environmentally sustainable than even the greenest suburbs, and how anti-city bias continues to persist among environmentalists. The chapter on the ridiculousness of LEED certifications is worth it alone.

...more

like

· see review

Oct 03, 2009

Shinynickel marked it as to-read

Off this review:

Green Metropolis: Why Living Smaller, Living Closer, and Driving Less are the Keys to Sustainability
By David Owen (Riverhead Books)
We may fantasize that country life involves growing our own food, backyard composting, and living in harmony with nature. In reality, Owen argues, it means driving everywhere. City dwellers are in fact the greener citizens, he writes, as they consume and dispose of less waste, and most importantly, drive far fewer miles. Prius ...more

like

· see review

Nov 12, 2009

Mary rated it

Shelves: nonfiction, histoir, craftyness, the-good-life

Green Metropolis is written by a guy who admittedly does not live that greenly. He has a big house with a big garage and lots of storage space out in the country, and drives to the post office which is barely a mile away. His basic premise, based on the fact that oil is not going to last us that much longer, is that living more densely, and therefore driving less, is the way to save the environment. Especially: anything that makes driving less pleasurable is eco-friendly, and anything that makes...moreGreen Metropolis is written by a guy who admittedly does not live that greenly. He has a big house with a big garage and lots of storage space out in the country, and drives to the post office which is barely a mile away. His basic premise, based on the fact that oil is not going to last us that much longer, is that living more densely, and therefore driving less, is the way to save the environment. Especially: anything that makes driving less pleasurable is eco-friendly, and anything that makes driving easier is not.
If cars are made room for, if highways are widened, if parking lots are enlarged and cars themselves get handier and more efficient, use of them will be encouraged, and public transit, walking, or biking become less appealing.
In the planning process of new communities and buildings, open space is usually encouraged so as to make things visually appealing. (Don't even get him started on city zoning.) But when it comes to living and working in these new places, the more space there is between buildings, the harder it is to get anywhere on foot. Many new offices (even of companies that tout their eco-friendliness) have wide acreages of land outside the city center, build sprawling low buildings on them surrounded by even bigger parking lots, require wider roads to service the employees, and then slap solar panels on top that contribute .5% to the building's energy needs.
So, it turns out taller buildings are more eco-friendly because it's easier to move things vertically via elevators (which don't use much energy because they are counterweighted) than to move them horizontally via foot-power or gas-power. Also, smaller living spaces that share more walls are obviously more eco-friendly because they don't use as much energy to heat or light.
And when it comes down to it, even buying local isn't that eco-friendly. Think of the small loads of a few pumpkins that had to be driven in from the farm, per pound, and then think of the huge shipments of onions and lettuce and peaches that all came on the same train from California. Which is more wasteful? Don't you hate to read this?
Anyway, it's a really good book, made me think, and made me a little mad, but I do recommend it. I has reinforced my will to live smaller and try to be less wasteful. It might help you, too.

Also, Green Metropolis AND Crunchy Cons (by Rod Dreher) both mentioned a book by Jane Jacobs from the early 60s, called The Death and Life of Great American Cities, and apparently she was ahead of her time when it comes to city planning & city living. It should be arriving next week from abebooks.com, and I can't wait! (less)

like

· see review

Jul 25, 2011

Gunnari rated it

Shelves: 2011-books

An exceptionally interesting read for those looking towards sustainability and green living. Given the nature of the subject matter, I was pleasantly surprised at just how easily the topics flowed. David Owen has a very personable and easy going writing style that was easy to enjoy. It was quite apparent how much he cared about the subject given how opinionated he was about certain topics, especially the LEED standard.

This book helped to illustrate to me that while a city looks like...moreAn exceptionally interesting read for those looking towards sustainability and green living. Given the nature of the subject matter, I was pleasantly surprised at just how easily the topics flowed. David Owen has a very personable and easy going writing style that was easy to enjoy. It was quite apparent how much he cared about the subject given how opinionated he was about certain topics, especially the LEED standard.

This book helped to illustrate to me that while a city looks like it is exceptionally wasteful, that it is in fact one of the most efficient types of living to be found. He helped to drive home how my own experiences over the past year have shown what a difference it is to live in the city. Since almost everything I need is within a few mile radius, I have found myself less likely to drive and planning to get rid of my car. I have seen first hand that city dwellers typically generate less trash, walk more, drive less, use less electricity, and have fewer personal possessions. All of these beneficial practices or outcomes are possible due to city dwelling

David was exceptionally blunt with his assessment of the LEED standard. He illustrated that it was a great idea however, it has been bogged down in difficult and expensive paperwork. These difficulties lead to people avoiding the standard or investing in technology or items that are essentially LEED fluff. The most telling anecdote that he used was regarding the first LEED platinum certified building in the country. Not only did they move an organization that was in Annapolis, Maryland an hour away, they also managed to install a slotted wooden framework in front of their solar panels, which reduced their energy viability to less than 0.5%. Not one of the architects, designers, or LEED consultants picked up that one of their environmentally friendly add-ons was going to render another installation to insignificance.

The part that I found absolutely astounding was that the author is on a soap box preaching about how great city living is for the environment and for individuals themselves, yet he lives in the suburbs. He regales the reader with stories about how he has fallen into the same pitfalls as most other suburban and country residents, yet he chooses to remain where he currently lives. His justification of staying in his suburban house outside of New York, instead of moving back into Manhattan, was that even if he sold his cars, house, and possessions that someone else would just come take his place. While Mr. Owen had plenty of excellent and informative points on top of his soap box, this book was another classic example of 'do as I say, not as I do', and it didn't sit well with this reader.(less)

like

· see review

Nov 17, 2009

Marjanne rated it

I think to most people this book would seem revolutionary and completely different from everything they've ever heard about being 'green'. Having read a couple of books on being more environmentally friendly with different focuses (i.e. homes, gardening, transportation, etc.), there was a lot here that made sense of some things that were stated in other books I read, even if they weren't necessarily highlighted. I had read that homes that share walls are more energy efficient, so it makes sense ...more

like

· see review

Mar 12, 2010

Caleb rated it

David Owen is part of what I have come to think of us critical environmentalists. These types are thoughtful, trained, and involved thinkers and activists--as well as whatever profession that might actually pay them--who generally share the tenants of environmentalism at large, have some pretty weighty critiques of their own. In one way, Green Metropolis is for an earlier generation of environmentalists than myself. It may just be me, but his thesis that urban style population density is good...moreDavid Owen is part of what I have come to think of us critical environmentalists. These types are thoughtful, trained, and involved thinkers and activists--as well as whatever profession that might actually pay them--who generally share the tenants of environmentalism at large, have some pretty weighty critiques of their own. In one way, Green Metropolis is for an earlier generation of environmentalists than myself. It may just be me, but his thesis that urban style population density is good--in that it makes so many other, more obvious environmental issues easier or redundant--is not earth-shattering. Rather, what Owen manages is an insightful, well-researched argument to convert the anti-urban back-to-the-landers of his and later eras, which does include some among me, too.

Take, for example, the absolutely keen criticism of LEED certification and "green architecture": On one side you might find a corporate campus with wide, lush lawns, rain barrels, green roofs, CFL bulbs, thorough insulation, and bike racks; on the other you have a tall, decades old skyscraper, knee-to-knee with similar buildings, without a patch of green on any side in an asphalt metropolis such as Manhattan. Well, the former could pick up some level of LEED certification and the other, well, it probably won't, not because it is less green but because "green architecture" doesn't account for some of the easiest stuff a building or city might support or accomplish. How do employees get to work at either locale? How far do the employees have to commute to work? How effective is heating and cooling? And, for that matter, how effective are the bells and whistles like solar paneling or employee showers for bikers?

Owen manages to cut through what is essentially the recently born technological prowess and sets it aside, pointing out the many successes already around us. In addition, he deals heavily with the conflicts of driving less (fewer cars, less exhaust, less asphalt, etc.) and greater gas mileage (driving more cheaply, going farther, more traffic, greater commutes, etc.) and similar, counterintuitive environmental issues. Owen successfully and concisely challenges our expectations for greenness and environmental sustainability. He also, potentially, intertwines a larger argument about how we want our lives to look and what not only sustainable but satisfied communities ought to look like.(less)

like

· see review

Feb 17, 2011

Sarah rated it

Shelves: non-fiction

The author raises a lot of interesting points, but it's hard to take him seriously when he doesn't back them up with alternate solutions, numbers or anything really other than complaints. This book is an ode to New York City, if it doesn't work like New York, it stinks in terms of its environmentalism. LEED stinks, cars stink (big and small, hybrid and not), houses, malls, other cities, sprawl, locavorism, widening roads, parks in the middle of a city, sidewalks that are too big. Basically no...more

like 1 like

· see review

Jan 09, 2010

SweetPea rated it

Shelves: 2010, nook, non-fiction, pg-count-medium, library

I really enjoyed reading this book, up until the latter part where the author provided a wholly inadequate explanation for why he did not live in the way that he felt the rest of the world should be moving towards.

The points in the book about how and why urban living, in particular Manhattan, is in many ways the most desirable from an environmental perspective, was fascinating since I had not thought about being "green" in those ways. I think the author made powerful argume...more

like

· see review

Dec 31, 2009

Link rated it

Shelves: economics, sustainability

This is well researched and written and focused on key issues central to building a sustainable culture. The neglected issue of population density is most prominent, but the author also covers many other related issues and debunks many widely held myths about sustainability, such as the high relative priority we currently give to recycling, mass transit and various high-tech schemes for salvation. Owen maintains that Manhattan's population density is in part an accident due to a favorable geogra...more

like

· see review

Jan 26, 2010

Joshua rated it

Shelves: cities, environmentalism, journalism, nyc

This book was a good read, but it was unsatisfying considering it is a call for either complacency (If you live in NYC there's no need to have more energy efficient buildings because you use so little gas by not driving) or defeatism (If you don't live in NYC nothing you do matters, because you drive too much. Anything that makes cars more efficient is bad, because people will just drive them then. Etc.) It's also a bit unfocused -- he makes his entire point in the first chapter and then wanders...more

like

· see review

Jul 02, 2011

Jien rated it

There were a handful of interesting ideas and good points, but unfortunately the majority of this book combined illogic and self-contradiction with a dash of flat out hypocrisy. He's right that it's better to build up than out, and suburbs are far less 'green' than cities, but he overlooked vital facts, like 25% of children in New York have asthma because of the pollution, when he wrote about how traffic jams and idling cars were a good thing ecologically. There were even some places where he co...more

like

· see review

Apr 03, 2011

CJ added it

Shelves: environmental

This is an intriguing book. The author makes some very good suggestions regarding what is a truly green way to live. He writes of New York being such a green city which in some ways is true. I find it funny that the author does not live such a life and when it comes to responding to the reason he does not is that if he sold his current home it would do know good because someone else would live that life instead. He has good points about urban planning that currently is being done and that we...more

like

· see review

Jul 20, 2010

Sonia rated it

In actuality, I only read half of this book. The author of this book moved from NYC to the suburbs of Connecticut and penned this books from his farm house as him and his wife moved to the country -- to have more space -- to raise their family quite some time ago. I was unable to push this hypocrisy out of my mind while reading why NYC is such a good template for green living while the author himself worries about watering his yard and making trips to the grocery store and back in his hybrid c...more

like

· see review

title link	preview: Green Metropolis: What the City Can Teach the Country About True Sustainability
avg rating	preview: Green Metropolis: What the City Can Teach the Country About True Sustainability Goodreads rating: 3.54 (272 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6402548-green-metropolis?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1250955962m/6402548.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6402548-green-metropolis?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Green Metropolis: What the City Can Teach the Country About True Sustainability by David Owen[/url]

Green Metropolis: What the City Can Teach the Country About True Sustainability

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (8)

Genres

Readers Also Enjoyed

Books by David Owen

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About Green Metropolis:...

Green Metropolis: What the City Can Teach the Country About True Sustainability

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topicDiscuss This Book

combine Other Editions (8)

Genres

Readers Also Enjoyed

Books by David Owen

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About Green Metropolis:...

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (8)