Apples and Oranges?

Comparisons between European cities and U.S. cities.

How many times have you heard the comparison between European cities and U.S. cities and the amount of greenhouse gases produced, the amount of fossil fuels used? U.S cities do not come out very well.

But what is being compared?

Let us remember that the U.S. – and especially the West – developed in an era of exceptionally cheap energy, cheap land, cheap building materials, and abundant water. European cities were developed in a time of human and animal power, and land ownership concentrated in the hands of the few. Imagine the urban form that results when it is a matter of human or horse drawn carts? What about having to bring building materials from far away? Clearly a dense urban fabric is far more efficient to build, easier to move around in, and easier to supply.

The U.S. had abundant natural resources and began its real expansion and urbanization in the fossil fuel age. There were no apparent constraints on supplies of much of anything, except population numbers. The US, endowed with huge forests, oil deposits, coal, and mineral richness, and more land than could be settled, was subject to few material constraints on growth. Private property rights meant even fewer obstacles to expansion, especially with federal largess regarding the disposal of the public domain.

Today, of course, American settlement patterns are highly energy dependent. While in the 20th century automobile ownership and transportation meant freedom and mobility, today the infrastructure patterns pose challenges as fossil fuel dependency comes with increasing costs and ineluctable pollution burdens.

Without understanding history, however, it is easy to point the finger at American energy profligacy. The more important question is how to reimagine living on the land in a parsimonious manner after having benefited from an exceptional century – the century of abundance.