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.
I tried to stay away from Hong Kong and Tokyo for obvious reasons. It's a reason why people that live in world class cities generally don't include Houston on the level of the big 7 in the US. Taking nothing away from the city, the political climate along with the sprawl doesn't give it the same look and feel. The best thing to do is travel and live in what are arguably the top 20 cities in the world. You will find out that Houston and Dallas have a ways to go.
Top 7:
NY
DC
LA
Chicago
SF
Boston
Philadelphia
Philly and Boston are not up there with NY, LA, and Chicago and not with DC or SF either.
Lets get back down to reality here, having history and being urban doesn't exempt you from where you stand in the U.S. and for Boston and Philly it can be 6-9 depending on who you ask. Philly is a home name, most people abroad dont know much of it as its overshadowed and it doesnt market itself enough to warrant people in say Tokyo to think of the place. Most national surveys on desirability or travel info on international travelers will support that as will immigration statistics and foreign business relations with other cities on different continents. Critically the only 4 cities in the U.S. that I can see on a full global stage are NY, LA, SF, and Chicago. DC is known but the city has a long way to go as do the cities of Philly, Miami, Houston, Boston, Atlanta, and Dallas all cities having some global standing but still very much domestic names. When you survey people abroad about U.S. cities the most common answers are NY, LA, DC, SF, Chicago in this order for the cities they know of signifying the marketing of these city names abroad. Boston does well as well but is a tier below those 5.
BTW the only reason DC is mentioned in the same breath as NY, LA, Chicago, and SF is because it has the U.S. government and capital outside of that its in the same boat as Boston, Miami, Houston, Philly, Seattle, Dallas, Atlanta, Deroit
Well you cant advertise yourself for energy if the folks in your city dont use other forms of energy. Places like Chicago, Houston, LA, NY, Philly, Boston, and SF are the largest purchasers of green energy and almost 100% goes to government funded entities like buildings, schools, and construction sites with the solar panels, wind turbines, and electrical grids. Being a large purchaser of energy, especially clean/green energy is a good thing for switching the city from fossil fuel to alternative means. Also I find it perplexing you mention the rest of my list is the same when I mentioned the offshore wind farm which shares nothing in common with the government purchase of green energy
I meant that it's the same in that it's not very significant or noteworthy and that it wouldn't qualify Houston in any way to be an "energy capital". It's similar to what many cities are doing. Not always wind, but alternatives.
And I don't think that LA's green energy is mostly government offices and schools. If it were then the LA government or LAUSD would have been on that list with Houston. According to this LA Times article, LADWP (supplies all of the city of LA with power) managed to provide 20% of it's power from renewable sources in 2010. It was a fluke, but LA is requiring a full 33% by 2020.
I tried to stay away from Hong Kong and Tokyo for obvious reasons. It's a reason why people that live in world class cities generally don't include Houston on the level of the big 7 in the US. Taking nothing away from the city, the political climate along with the sprawl doesn't give it the same look and feel. The best thing to do is travel and live in what are arguably the top 20 cities in the world. You will find out that Houston and Dallas have a ways to go.
Top 7:
NY
DC
LA
Chicago
SF
Boston
Philadelphia
Just about any city has a ways to go when compared to Tokyo. It is stupid to compare Houston and Dallas to Tokyo. You need to compare then to Cities in their size range
Houston by city is comparable to Belgrade, Birmingham, Manchester, Warsaw, Stockholm, Brussels frankfurt, etc
By Metro Houston and Dallas are comparable to Bangalore, Barcelona, etc.
Houston and Dallas stack up quite nicely to international cities there size, but it is rather stupid to pick the largest metro in the world to compare them with.
I meant that it's the same in that it's not very significant or noteworthy and that it wouldn't qualify Houston in any way to be an "energy capital". It's similar to what many cities are doing. Not always wind, but alternatives.
And I don't think that LA's green energy is mostly government offices and schools. If it were then the LA government or LAUSD would have been on that list with Houston. According to this LA Times article, LADWP (supplies all of the city of LA with power) managed to provide 20% of it's power from renewable sources in 2010. It was a fluke, but LA is requiring a full 33% by 2020.
LA is a very impressive place for green energy, currently has the largest inland wind farm in the U.S. The energy industry is no different from any other, it has one place where the bulk of its concentration and intelligence is which in this case is Houston. Just as the tech industry while having a hub around SF Bay has strong presence in places like Boston, Seattle, New York, Chicago, Austin, Richmond, Raleigh, Dallas is doing things all around. Whats really happening is that other areas in the U.S. are all trying to model themselves after one another to expand their economies, always a good thing IMO.
I meant that it's the same in that it's not very significant or noteworthy and that it wouldn't qualify Houston in any way to be an "energy capital". It's similar to what many cities are doing. Not always wind, but alternatives.
And I don't think that LA's green energy is mostly government offices and schools. If it were then the LA government or LAUSD would have been on that list with Houston. According to this LA Times article, LADWP (supplies all of the city of LA with power) managed to provide 20% of it's power from renewable sources in 2010. It was a fluke, but LA is requiring a full 33% by 2020.
put it that way ask anyone in the Tech industry where the capital is they will tell you the Bay area
ask anyone in the education industry where the capital is they will tell you Boston
in the entertainment industry they will tell you LA
Finance, they will tell you NY
ask anyone in the Energy industry and you will get a resounding HOUSTON.
plain and simple. stop over analyzing it. In all these sectors the next highest city for that industry has a waaaaaays to go to catch up
Not being funny, but where have you been outside of the states. What a magazine states and what you see yourself isn't always the same thing.
To your point on Philadelphia and Boston, they are debatable. DC is respected more global than it is domestic. The whole world follows DC. They don't follow LA and Chicago is debatable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slyman11
Philly and Boston are not up there with NY, LA, and Chicago and not with DC or SF either.
Lets get back down to reality here, having history and being urban doesn't exempt you from where you stand in the U.S. and for Boston and Philly it can be 6-9 depending on who you ask. Philly is a home name, most people abroad dont know much of it as its overshadowed and it doesnt market itself enough to warrant people in say Tokyo to think of the place. Most national surveys on desirability or travel info on international travelers will support that as will immigration statistics and foreign business relations with other cities on different continents. Critically the only 4 cities in the U.S. that I can see on a full global stage are NY, LA, SF, and Chicago. DC is known but the city has a long way to go as do the cities of Philly, Miami, Houston, Boston, Atlanta, and Dallas all cities having some global standing but still very much domestic names. When you survey people abroad about U.S. cities the most common answers are NY, LA, DC, SF, Chicago in this order for the cities they know of signifying the marketing of these city names abroad. Boston does well as well but is a tier below those 5.
BTW the only reason DC is mentioned in the same breath as NY, LA, Chicago, and SF is because it has the U.S. government and capital outside of that its in the same boat as Boston, Miami, Houston, Philly, Seattle, Dallas, Atlanta, Deroit
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.