Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.
Start by marking “Green Metropolis: What the City Can Teach the Country About True Sustainability” as Want to Read:
Green Metropolis: What the City Can Teach the Country About True Sustainability
Enlarge cover
Rate this book
Clear rating
Open Preview

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

3.72  ·  Rating details ·  1,332 ratings  ·  193 reviews
Most Americans think of crowded cities as ecological nightmares--as wastelands of concrete and garbage and diesel fumes and traffic jams. Yet residents of compact urban centers, David Owen shows, individually consume less oil, electricity, and water than other Americans. They live in smaller spaces, discard less trash, and, most important of all, spend far less time in aut ...more
Hardcover, 368 pages
Published September 24th 2009 by Riverhead Hardcover (first published 2009)
More Details... Edit Details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about Green Metropolis, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about Green Metropolis

Community Reviews

Showing 1-30
Average rating 3.72  · 
Rating details
 ·  1,332 ratings  ·  193 reviews

More filters
Sort order
Start your review of Green Metropolis: What the City Can Teach the Country About True Sustainability
Jim Fonseca
Oct 19, 2013 rated it really liked it
Surprise! New York City is a model of energy efficiency and low environmental impact. Because of its density and congestion, people walk and take mass transit rather than own autos. Most can't afford large apartments, so owners and renters occupy relatively small living spaces in terms of square feet per person. Waste heat is less because shared walls help heat adjacent homes. The list of advantages of dense urban living goes on and on.


In contrast, Dubai, the Las Vegas of the Middle East, is su
May 17, 2011 rated it did not like 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 cities, which set
Nov 13, 2010 rated it really liked it
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 that if he
There is a really good 10,000 word article here, but unfortunately rather than sell that to The Atlantic, the author chose to expand it into a book. The result is painfully repetitive, despite my general agreement with his basic ideas--cars are environmentally terrible, people are fundamentally motivated not by platitudes but by their own comfort/discomfort, zoning as currently practiced in the U.S. makes everyone's life worse, LEED is a mess, and density is the only true route to sustainability ...more
Jan 02, 2010 rated it did not like 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 live is in big cities
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
Apr 30, 2015 rated it really liked it
This is a tough one to review. It's very clear and readable and not boring. His central point, that living in cities, i.e. high population density in vibrant neighborhoods, is environmentally (and probably in other ways) much better than sprawling, car-centered, low-density living, is well-backed-up and convincing.

But I get the feeling reading it that he is glossing over a lot of important points. He just barely pays attention to why so many people seem to want to move out into the suburbs, ins
Jul 14, 2020 rated it liked it
If you consider yourself an environmentalist because you drive a Prius, recycle, shop at the farmer's market and grow a few of your own vegetables, you are in for a rude awakening with this thought-provoking book. I wanted to plug my ears (I read the audio version) through much of the book because what Owen describes as environmentally sustainable ideas and behavior just doesn't jive with my sense of fun. In fact, Owen seems to have a little too much fun relinquishing the agricultural idealists ...more
Erica Clou
Full of good interesting points, not a lot of things we can apply outside a large policy-level scale. Also he completely ignores how climate change is likely to wipe out large coastal cities like New York.
Mar 06, 2010 rated it it was ok
Some of David Owen's points about sustainability in this book were good; cars are a huge negative in terms of carbon emission and energy/oil use, and cutting down on their use is a good thing. At the same time, Jane Jacobs' book Life and Death of the American City (which Owen quotes frequently), already covered that. I definitely agree that spreading out our population is unsustainable, and Owen puts this idea out there in an understandable fashion; as a city dweller in Philadelphia, I see how m ...more
Betsy Scherer
I just finished this minutes ago over my lunch break so it’s still fresh! David’s thesis: living in a dense city is a significantly more sustainable decision over living in a suburb or the country. Which I find very intriguing!

The good: def enjoyed his perspective on LEED certification, solar panels, recycling, and eating locally. And how the discourse around these green practices is off and they have hidden / higher carbon footprints. There isn’t a be all, end all approach that will save or off
Nov 26, 2020 rated it really liked it
3.5 stars
Apr 12, 2010 rated it it was ok
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.

The argu
Michael Potter
Jan 10, 2012 rated it really liked it
Originally posted to RE:Fraction International in March of 2010

Green Metropolis: Why Living Smaller, Living Closer, and Driving Less Are the Keys to Sustainability, by David Owen, Riverhead Books, NYC, 2009, 324pp, makes a great argument for people in Albany, Buffalo, Rochester, and Syracuse, New York, to enjoy the innumerable benefits of one of the greatest agents of environmental change that residents of New York City have (mostly) take for granted for
Jul 18, 2014 rated it liked it
There were things I liked about this book, and things I didn't. First off, I found myself often wondering what environmental movement he was talking about, as just about every environmentalist I am familiar with is singing the praises of urban living. Clearly, David Owen doesn't read Grist. And yet, he eventually told us what environmentalists he was talking about, and I guess I have to admit that there are some who just don't seem to get it.
I also thought the tone of the book was pretty lousy.
Todd Martin
Jun 05, 2019 rated it liked it
The premise of Green Metropolis is that cities (particularly those with high population densities) are good for the environment … or at least better for the environment than say, the ecological blight that is urban/suburban sprawl. David Owen, a staff writer for The New Yorker, presents this as somewhat of a revelation, but this is a fact has been known for quite some time. In cities it’s easier to get around using public transportation, homes are smaller (using less energy for heating and cooli ...more
Heather Denkmire
Nov 09, 2010 rated it liked 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 shame in my prefere ...more
Oct 31, 2012 rated it liked it
The premise of this book… that densely-settled, public-transportation-depend cities are the most sustainable way for people to live… seems very true and believable, so much so that I got tired of the author trying so hard to convince me of what I had already accepted by the first chapter. I wish instead that he had spent more time explaining how the uniquely green aspects of Manhattan can be in any way be applied to existing communities that are small or already sprawl victims. I came up with so ...more
Jan 02, 2014 rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
Intriguing, very counterintuitive. The book is essentially a systematic debunking of all the assumptions Americans commonly make about what sustainable, green living would look like. For example, it would *not* involve buying a Prius, installing high-tech windows, putting in solar panels, shifting toward consumption of locally produced food and other goods, building LEED certified buildings, or moving to a rural area and "living off the land." On the contrary, any of those steps would more than ...more
Jan 15, 2011 rated it liked 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 nothi ...more
John Stevenson
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, because we would ...more
Anna Carlsson
Jul 07, 2012 rated it really liked it
Really interesting book. Granted, it mostly confirmed beliefs I've had for a while about why cities are inherently more sustainable (density being the top reason), but I also appreciated his insight into how the traditional environmentalist movement, which is more about glorifying nature than sustaining it, has actually hurt the earth. Also: we're fucked. I came away from from this feeling like the values and traditions that make our lifestyles so inherently destructive are far too entrenched to ...more
Apr 17, 2013 rated it really liked it
Shelves: urbs-aeterna
Urban development and sustainability are two topics that are quite close to my heart, being a committed bike-riding, inveterate urbanite. So in some ways, I couldn't go wrong with a book from an expert extolling some of my favorite ideas about urban density, the importance of transit, and the un-sustainability of sprawl.

The whole thing, alas, is nearly ruined by the knowledge that the author, of all people, does not practice what he spends hundreds of pages preaching, and instead lives the car-
Jun 18, 2014 rated it really liked it
The argument that people who love nature should probably live in big cities may seem counter intuitive on the surface, but it makes perfect sense to me. Suburban sprawl, where no one walks anywhere and public transportation is a laugh, basically forces people to drive miles to get anywhere while simultaneously turning the landscape into asphalt and turf grass. Owen's point about mixed zoning is an excellent one.

I also like the point he makes about the boring things like insulation and water use
Jordan Sandrock
Jul 19, 2019 rated it liked it
Owen makes some good points about building green (things like prioritizing insulation, reducing the size of a space, and considering the building's relationship to the community around it). However, I found his argument slightly repetitive and inconsiderate of the reality that most people simply can't afford to live in high density areas. A study recently came out that said to afford a one bedroom apartment in my city, a person would have to make $22/hour. The minimum wage is only $14/hour. Mind ...more
Jun 26, 2020 added it
For my final month of reading and reflecting on scholar level, non-scientific books for the forseeable near-future, my random grab off the library book shelf has brought you today the musings of David Owen’s “Green Metropolis: Living Smaller, Living Closer, and Driving Less.”

Essentially, there you have it right in the title! Owen’s thesis is essentially that in the coming future where there is a lot less of everything for a whole heck-of-a-lot-more people, the only sustainable way to live is goi
Mario Mariotta IV
Feb 07, 2019 rated it really liked it
Recommends it for: everyone outside of cities and people who think they are environmentalists but hate cities
BIAS DISCLAIMER: I'm an environmentalist and pro-urban, pro-city or whatever. I love cities, so I came to this book already biased. I loved cities since I was a child, yet I was and am still a biodiversity conservationist and habitat restoration implementer and sustainability aware. I felt conflicted for most of my life, but then I realized that my love for cities and my passion to preserve and protect "the environment", i.e. wildlands, nature preserves, high quality habitats, were completely al ...more
Camille McCarthy
Sep 03, 2017 rated it liked it
Much of this book is also covered in "the Conundrum," although that book is a lot shorter and covers many more topics than this one does.
I appreciated going further in-depth regarding how to plan cities to be more environmentally friendly, because I thought that "the Conundrum" didn't give enough detail to make me see the solutions, only the problems. In particular, I enjoyed the part about LEED certification and how it can be improved.
He has a bit of a cranky-old-man tone, in much the same
Wendi Lau
Sep 19, 2017 rated it liked it
The beginning of this book is off-putting as Mr. Owen extols the environmental EFFICIENCY of large urban areas. New York City is his primary example, compared to his newer locale in the suburbs. I thought he meant large cities are better overall, while I argue a decreased quality of life, increased crime, and fewer green spaces as urban density increases. However, Mr. Owen tends to stick to addressing resource efficiency, which really, is what true green living and environmentalism should be abo ...more
Noah Fossick
Sep 10, 2020 rated it liked it
This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.
« previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 next »
There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Readers also enjoyed

  • Walkable City: How Downtown Can Save America, One Step at a Time
  • The Death and Life of Great American Cities
  • Happy City: Transforming Our Lives Through Urban Design
  • Triumph of the City: How Our Greatest Invention Makes Us Richer, Smarter, Greener, Healthier and Happier
  • Cities for People
  • The Image of the City
  • Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space
  • Architecture: Form, Space, & Order
  • Cities of Tomorrow: An Intellectual History of Urban Planning and Design in the Twentieth Century
  • Streetfight: Handbook for an Urban Revolution
  • Twilight of the Elites: America After Meritocracy
  • Architects' Data
  • 101 Things I Learned in Architecture School
  • Edge City: Life on the New Frontier
  • Antisocial: Online Extremists, Techno-Utopians, and the Hijacking of the American Conversation
  • Fashionopolis: The Price of Fast Fashion and the Future of Clothes
  • Pedaling Revolution: How Cyclists Are Changing American Cities
  • Raised in Captivity: Fictional Nonfiction
See similar books…

News & Interviews

What will you do when it's your turn to pick your book club's next read? Well, this is what you won't do: panic. Why not? Because we've dug...
56 likes · 10 comments
“The crucial fact about sustainability is that it is not a micro phenomenon: there can be no such thing as a “sustainable” house, office building, or household appliance, for the same reason that there can be no such thing as a one-person democracy or a single-company economy.” 4 likes
“There are too many people in the world, and too many more are on the way. This is an issue that, in the United States, both conservatives and liberals have often seemed eager to avoid--for conservatives, perhaps, because it raises questions about family size, birth control, and abortion, and for liberals because it raises questions about immigration. Every one of the world's environmental problems is made worse by increases in the number of humans, and, most of all, by increases in the number of Americans, since U.S. residents--whether manufactured locally or imported from abroad--have the largest energy and carbon footprints in the world.” 1 likes
More quotes…