'Murica

Everyone comes from different backgrounds and places, cities or mountains, lakes or oceans, and we're all raised to view our world different consequently. But in a world with a booming population and a finite amount of resources, which "lifestyle" (urban, rural, suburban, etc) is most efficient? Or better put, what kinds of lifestyle are most sustainable?

Embed

  1. I think super cities built with high natural values and lots of untouched wilderness in between makes sense to be ok for mother earth
  2. rural because it makes less pollution and is more focused on living off the land instead of building up the land
  3. I come from a suburban area so I think that is the best environment, but I also have my reasons. While rural areas preserve the environment, it makes people too spread out and that require more fuel needed to be burned to get them to places to do the most basic things, like grocery shopping. Urban centers, while it requires less traveling to get the basic necessities, are heavily polluted and in turn, affect the health of the people and the environment. Suburbs, are close enough to the basic human necessities that not as much fuel will be burned to get from place to place. It is also far enough from the city to not be too heavily polluted and should that become a problem, I feel that clean up processes are more manageable.
  4. Definitely an urban setting, we have too many people for anything else to work. However, without good city planning that can easily backfire (as we see in most cities around the world). Ideally we rework cities into smaller, self contained systems. Maybe something akin to Greek city states?
  5. I think the best type of society for the Earth is rural. A rural society seems to appreciate the resources that the Earth provides and it keeps the environment in check.
  6. You can be sustainable in all three, if you do it right. ($) However, in the city you can't have farm animals. If you look at sustainability in a self-sustainable way, I think rural is the way to go. It's more financially sustainable to live in the rural areas too. You can't live off the land in the city. From a human sustainability view, we can't put everyone in rural areas cause then they would be suburbs.
  7. The key is positioning livliehood relatively close to residences. I'm not sure how that works in a world that's increasingly dominated by a megacorporations. But you DON'T want a situation where people have to commute long distances to employment. That's clearly unsustainable. And,unfortunately, public transportation projects are incredibly expensive.
  8. A lifestyle where all parts of the system are used whether that be in an urban, rural, or suburban area it is possible in all three. Currently we are not using our resources in an efficient way in most urban settings but it is definitely possible and would be the most sustainable if these eco-technologies were implemented.
  9. rural living would have been ideal in the past but since were already at such a high level of population the only way to build is up.. so i say urban living is most sustainable
  10. Although rural areas appear to be more energy efficient at first, urban areas actually are more energy efficient when comparing the amount of energy each individual consumes factoring in the transportation and housing costs.
  11. ok i gotcha. then what is the best society? like what kind of hybrid of all societies make for the best society?
  12. You see Mr. Lukin, there truly is no answer to this question... we have already taken too much from our planet and only given back harmful byproducts, therefore there is no answer to this question YET. We need to find alternate methods for performing activities we do every day that require resources, then once we have gotten ourselves back on track and given back to the Earth all that we have taken, we may properly assess the situation. Some might say this is impossible... however, I beg to differ. Yes it will take an extremely long time, eons perhaps, but with the right research and full public cooperation, our world may be able to thrive again healthier than ever!
  13. However, my dearly beloved and dashing Mr. Russo, there is a clear and obvious answer to this perplexing question! It is far clear that an urban bound society is the safest way to go for Earth to grow and live sustainably. Without all of our buildings emitting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, then there is less carbon dioxide to produce ATP and glucose through the process of photosynthesis. Without glucose being produced, then there is no energy for all of Earth's organisms to use to do work via glycosis and the krebs cycle! By Golly!
  14. My friends, IT IS A TRAP! There are no B and C choices, friends how can you be so foolish. Thy cannot art thou into the blinded fool of ye. Lusted by the fact of thy question when thy answer is right in front of thee. We are our own worst enemy therefore we can never be the best example of thy best society. Thy lovers of the quarrel motion, we must unite and dance. We must all just dance, imagine if everything can be solved by just dancing. The possibilities that can come from it, rejoice my friends for the dancing era is inevitable.
1
Share

Share

Facebook
Google+