Over the past few years it seems that carbon emissions and the push for a zero carbon world has dominated environmental news.  Part of this is due to its high-profile advocates such as Al Gore for global warming, of which carbon emissions are a major factor, and impressive projects such as Masdar City in the U.A.E., the world’s first zero carbon city, by Sir Norman Foster.   The other part of its news domination is the cold hard fact that it is a major contributer to global warming.  Since the industrial era, the amount of carbon in the air has increased 35%.  As we “modernize” (i.e. cut down trees and use our natural resources), we reduce our planet’s natural carbon sinks (places that either store or exchange CO2 into other gases), and its percentage builds up.  The bad part is, that as this gas builds up, it warms our planet, thus reducing its ability to handle the carbon even further.  For example, our oceans are the largest carbon sink on our planet, handling up to 30% of all emissions ever. However, as the temperature of the ocean rises, even a fraction of a degree, its ability to dissolve the gas reduces, thus releasing more into the atmosphere which causes more warming . . . . it is a vicious cycle.  And one that is already in motion, which is why scientists are so concerned about reducing carbon emissions so drastically so quickly.

I am currently involved in an independent study that is looking to see if the layout of the urban grid in a city has any factor on carbon emissions.  If it does, then we may be able to lay out the cities of the future in a way that naturally promotes a zero carbon lifestyle.  I thought I would share the introduction to the study, with perhaps more to come later.  Enjoy!:

Introduction

In a world of dwindling natural resources, it is more important than ever to create places that are inherently less taxing to our natural environment.  For years people have understood that there are techniques to building in a way that demands less from our planet.  By existing more in harmony with the natural world, we call these built places sustainable.

The extent to which a building can be made to harmoniously exist in its environment certainly depends upon the locality in which it is placed.  In the past, we have understood this term “environment” to encompass climate and natural resources. However, with over 50% of the world’s population now living in cities, we are residing more and more in an environment of our own making.  City forms have a large factor in forming the location in which we are creating sustainable buildings.  Unlike the natural environment, we have a say in the shape of this form.  As such, is there a certain basic form we should be encouraging in our cities in order to allow our built environment to demand less from our dwindling natural resources?

Cities are incredibly severe on the natural world.  Such a concentration of people demands large-scale buildings and transit systems, which in turn intensify the modern problems created by our built world.  For example, buildings alone cause more than a third of the emissions for carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas mainly responsible for global warming. Transportation emissions comprise another third.  Cities incorporate both these sectors.  Being dense in their layout, there is little natural world to mitigate their problem at the site, which in turn is detrimental to both the city’s long-term health and the landscape that eventually receives the high concentrations of its emissions.  Many cities have recognized this major problem, and have vowed to become “zero-carbon” in the near future.  Most of the current efforts for a zero-carbon future focus upon mitigating the effect current levels, a massive undertaking in and of itself.  However, it may be possible to use the form of the city itself, the basic city grid, to self-regulate its emissions by encouraging less vehicular traffic and providing maximum opportunities for zero carbon building.  Such a possibility could drastically reduce carbon emissions from cities effortlessly.  Thus it becomes a worthwhile endeavor to ask:

Can the layout of the city grid effectively reduce carbon dioxide emissions?  What key factors of the grid influence its effectiveness in mitigating its own carbon dioxide emissions?

As a first step to answering these questions, we propose to compare and contrast different existing block forms within one city in order to learn if there is indeed a singular grid form that is more sustainable. For our purposes we have chosen Portland, Oregon- one of the cities seeking to become zero-carbon and the location of our university.  After choosing neighborhoods of similar density but varying block size, we will collect data such as traffic counts, size of streets, current CO₂ “sinks” (sites that absorb CO₂), average distance to amenities, street to lot ratios, and current carbon levels. From this analysis we hope to identify one particular grid system that provides the most potential for self-reliance, and thereby develop and ideal city grid form.