View Single Post
Old 05-29-11, 08:01 PM
  #11  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,873

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3943 Post(s)
Liked 117 Times in 92 Posts
Originally Posted by Robert Foster
Everyone would get 117 square yards and if they used this building system they would produce their own food and power.
...
Like I said right now 50+ percent of our population is urban and it used more than 50 percent of our energy. Traditional construction will continue to tap into the grid till at some point the grid will not be able to support the population. From our own governemt information half of our energy is used in transportation and that leaves half to be used to power our living and industry. It is hard to see a 50+ percent of the population using 73-75 percent of that available energy as being green, having a low carbon foot print or being earth friendly unless something changes.
The transportation costs are the potential achilles heel. If all these settlers stayed home most of the time, then perhaps they would realize the environmental benefits promised. But you spread people out at 15 per square mile, and a big concern would be all the roads and car travel that might generate. For the food they don't grow themselves, it's going to be a pretty inefficient and expensive distribution system getting it to all those spread out residences, compared to trucking stuff to a farmers' market in a downtown site, where people can carry it home on foot.

Last edited by cooker; 05-29-11 at 08:05 PM.
cooker is offline