Old 04-26-18, 03:17 PM
  #14  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,562

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7674 Post(s)
Liked 3,557 Times in 1,871 Posts
Originally Posted by Mobile 155
You change the weather patterns as they have in Chicago.
Originally Posted by cooker
That's a local effect. Global weather patterns are changing thanks to greenhouse gases, and you generate more of those, if you live non-densely, thanks to more miles driven by cars, delivery trucks, school buses etc. and higher home, office and shopping mall energy usage.
Global weather is the combination of many local weather patterns.

Arizona, because of air conditioning and lawn-watering, has a drastically changed regional climate—but that doesn’t affect anything outside the borders, because the atmosphere respects state lines, right?

Florida, because of paving and because of the harm done to the everglades, has had its climate changed … but that doesn’t affect anywhere else, I am sure.

Sorry … but the idea that changing local weather patterns doesn’t change regional, and global weather … not quite sure that is what you meant to say.

I mean, if there was only one atmosphere, and one ocean, and energy flowed around from higher to lower concentrations, like, in an entropic situation or something … but that’s’s not how it is. Climate change in Chicago ends at the city limits. We all know that.

Originally Posted by cooker
I honestly don't know if a sewage plant that serves a million homes is more or less “green” than digging and servicing a million septic systems – do you have data on that?
No, but a septic tank is basically a storage tank for waste, which processes itself naturally. The sludge doesn’t need the degree to treatment that city sewage does. Same with water. City sewage plants need to use huge amounts of chemicals and energy to sterilize and filter waste and water … and the water needs to get back into the system pretty quickly.

I don’t have numbers on pollution, but it seems pretty clear that less pollution going into more water requires less treatment than more pollution going into less water. Some towns don’t even need to have water reclamation or water treatment plants ….. and some cities pump wastewater right back into the system non-stop.

Originally Posted by Mobile 155
You trap your own polution and need assistance to dispose of your waste.
Originally Posted by cooker
Bad air quality is now regional and not confined to cities, but even where it is worse in cities, that is not an indication the cities are creating more pollution than the same number of people living in outlying areas – they’re actually creating less - just that they aren't dispersing it as effectively.
Oi.

Yeah, as LA, Mexico City, and Beijing residents could all tell you. You freely admit that all those people living that close together creates a tremendously unhealthy environment … and then you recommend it? Go move to Beijing and after several years ask me if you think local air quality matters.

I didn’t mention just volume of waste … I mentioned Concentration of waste.

Same with factory farming as opposed to open-range farming. Talk to the people whole live near those pork factories about concentrated versus dispersed pollution.

Free-range people can live much healthier lives. Pack people closely together and they can do just the opposite.

Not trying to argue … I don’t have science to back up my observations and thoughts any more than you do. But if you think living packed together is a good thing, I suggest you get a very small apartment in a very dirty city and report back when you have science.

Your points about lawns are well taken. Nothing is so stupid or wasteful (that’s hyperbole, so don’t even think about taking it otherwise) as spending fresh water, and time, and effort, and plant food and all that on grass … particularly non-native species.

No food value, very little value at all …. Beats pavement but doesn’t beat native vegetation, and certainly doesn’t beat a food garden.

But space is a good thing. Packing people too closely together strikes me as a bad idea, mostly born out of economic need (I notice that as soon as people can they get larger apartments, or move right out of the city, or both.)

People used to huddle together for protection, and walled cities constrained city-dwellers to lie in tight confines … but you don’t see tight, tiny clusters of farm houses. Given the chance, most people seem to like to have a little space around them
Maelochs is offline