Eco-cities....How cool is this?????

China has started draughting plans for its first eco-cities. check out this article:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051106/wl_uk_afp/britainchinaenergy_051106000829
i have TOTAL respect(on this matter) for the chinese for doing this, and hopefully it will lead the way to the encouragement of global sustainable development.
peace and love

 

yip, it's cool

 

Heard about that a while back and sounds goofgoo! Of course, it will still have all the pollution from people living there (cars, consumables, etc.) so I don't think we should get carried away too much. I mean, if you took a normal city and removed all the people - it would be the most eco-friendly in the world save the concrete footprint of it.

There is a more detailed article here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4682011.stm
I think one advantage the Chinese work has is that they are building new cities, so basically can design in eco-features from day one whereas retro-fitting existing cities is presumably a much more difficult task! Of course, building a new city from scratch isn't particulary eco-friendly as presumably it means the loss of what was once green fields, etc.

On a more negative note, isn't China planning on building 400 coal or nuclear power stations over the next few years? Oh dear! Although on the upside, I did read a fascinating article about Chinese aims to develop "risk-free" mini-nuclear power stations, which cannot go into melt down, though you still have the issue of nuclear material about and because they are smaller you need thousands of them, like one in every small town and perhaps dozens to serve a city.

Sorry to ramble!

 

well first off bro u werent rambling, it was a very pleasant and informing bit of chit chat. But just on the point of:

well i did not mean to make it look like that i started this thread as a tribute to the glory of the emerging power of china, in an act of undying patriotism. Rather i said: " have TOTAL respect(on this matter) for the chinese for doing this, and hopefully it will lead the way to the encouragement of global sustainable development". So i am sorry if it appeared like i was singing china's praises.
i just heard some news that was very positive for the whole world, and the potential to be such a GREAT thing. Its a step in the right direction at the very least. If it is a success in China, then maybe it will spread.
So instead of looking at China's bad points in this thread, maybe we could try and discuss something constructive...like how this could benefit the world, and how we can implement sustainablity in other places.
peace and love

 

Well, having thought about it some more - I'm not sure the original concept is that great either. Sure, it's better than a conventional city - so in the sense of converting EXISTING cities over to the concept it's surely an improvement! But in this example, these are all NEW cities, and whichever way you look at it this is bad news.

I actually wonder if the whole idea came about (along with coining the term "eco-city") was to make the idea of building new cities to house 400 million(!) people more digestible to the World's environmentalists.

So again, trying not get on a downer here - but I think there are both good and bad things to draw from this.

 

yea u are probably right bro..... but at the end of the day they arent creating new people. People make the pollution and destroy the enviroment. so are they building new cities to home rural people (thus condensing a sparsed population into a smaller space, and leaving more space,potentially, to nature. Though to be honest i doubt this "new" space would go to nature), or will it re-house existing city dwellers?

To be honest i dont know much more about all this then the web page i previously posted
peace and love

 

hi friends
let me join you
I want to tell you something about eco-cities
What about to found an eco...village at first in....ANTARCTIC? of cource not near the pole, there is -60Csometimes, but near the ocean, where average is only -2C? that would be great and..imagine, no goverment. WE'LL be the government of ourselves. and that does not mean any isolation from the world, on the contrary.
If you are interested, just let me know.

 

lol, that's a pretty neat idea... but a couple of things to consider:

* stories about people like Shackleton remind you how dangerous and isolated it is down there
* although it maybe -2 near the ocean, as i understand it you would still be around 200 miles from the land mass of antartica itself
* what would you do for food?
* although there was an agreement not to "develop" antartica, AFAIK all of it is claimed by one country or another... australia... new zealend, uk... norway... argentinia, all have claims on most of it

 

yes I heard about. I know geography pretty well.
It is dangerous, of course, but I dont want to "develop" antarctica.
I think they will permit us to make there an eco village. we'll not spoil anything. I am talking about a little town, but initially anly 50-100 people can settle there.
this agreement exists, of course, but still there are several stations there.
our town at first can be like one of them
finally, about claims, we can find friends that are british or argentinian cityzens.
for food, we can use greenhouses.
I have a nice plan, believe
hink about and reply
peace

 

I wasn't suggesting you want to "develop" antartica... to me a proper eco-village afterall is one that can be dismantled and "leave no trace" and indeed it seems you are with me on this!

Are green houses really feasible? I don't really know about such things but I thought the southern/northern most latitudes had entire days of darkness during certain times of the year. I suppose you could generate excess food and store it during the "winter".

Have you considered Greenland? It's "owned" by Denmark. It's also a little more hospitable.

I would have thought fishing and hunting of seals was the traditional means (for hundreds of years) to gather food in such regions, but I really havn't reserached it much to be honest and not sure if these techniques would carry over to Antartica given the thickness of ice and distances involved.

 

of cource greenland is more hospitable, but the idea of mine is to live without any countrys suprimacy. that village, if anyone can do that, will have a status of special zone, or something like that. In my own country, the climate is far better than "hospitable", it's almost a paradise on earth, so I won't go to greenland))) anyway, I found out that many people spend there in antarctic even some months. so it's not so dangerous and if something happens, there are so many stations at hand there that no one let you die there this way.
but you can have your opinion, of course.
the problem is that i have to find people, at least 20 or 30 people to go there at first for one year or maybe a month, than we'll see what happens.
waiting for your opinion

 

I don't think Greenland is hardly ruled by some kind of Danish supremacy.

I think your biggest hurdle is political consent in Antartica, not just from the country which has a claim on the part where you want to base yourself, but also from other countries that may see it as a breach of the international Artic agreement.

Not trying to sound negative, but it seems like a project where you need lots of money, political weight and a high level of professionalism, etc. I for one would like to practice in an artic region such as northern Sweden during the winter, or Siberia, before trying something like Antartica. Indeed, the more I think about places to "practice" the more I think these places are simply more ideal, period !

 

Antartica!!!
That is pretty harsh conditions to try and survive in. To each his own. I applaud your courage and dedication and I will send you my best wishes.

Good luck!