Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Cities that are taking the most active role to mitigate their impact/detriment on the environment. The author of the study makes the connection to impacts of climate change
Thought it was interesting but like any other ranking not an end all be all...
well i know no matter what they do, they wont be able to change Seattle's climate. You could probably clean-cut every tree in western WA and i promise you it would still be gray-skied, raining, and cold. So they won't ever take Seattle off that "climate-ready" status. lol
Oh so it means climate ready as in environmental friendliness.
Because at first, I thought when it said climate ready it meant cities most prepared to deal with their weather and with natural disasters such as earthquakes, tornadoes, and other things like that. I am glad to hear it is not about that but about environmental friendliness instead.
I am not surprised by most of the cities on the list. I assume that website link is only talking about major cities with more than 400,000 people.
I knew San Francisco, Seattle, and Portland would be high up on the list for being climate ready which means environmental friendly.
I also knew Chicago, New York City, Washington DC, Philadelphia, San Jose, and San Diego would be on the list for the top 10.
I am surprised only by Denver making the list for the top 10.
Instead of Denver, I thought Boston would make the top 10 list.
"Use proxies and a methodology for ranking the largest cities in the U.S. based on a range of factors including political commitment (as measured by number of commitments the city has made with the U.S. Mayors, Carbon War Room Cities Challenge, Clinton 40, and ICLEI membership), green buildings (LEED buildings per capita), university leadership (AASHE membership/capita), transit access and use (range of metrics on heavy and light rail usage per capita), clean tech investment (venture funds based in city with clean tech investments in 2010) and energy and GHG emissions (from a range of sources)."
That's all well and good but hardly cause for mass celebration as many of the cities listed are around 30-40 years behind. Philadelphia for example is primarily a large SuperFund site and will take decades at the current rate to show any significant progress. It hardly inspires warm fuzzies that a couple of "green buildings" and that select leadership are finally talking about solutions.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
