City Slickers Greener than Country Bumpkins (recycling, eco-friendly, fertilize, plastics)

[sponger42]

Researchers: City residents produce less carbon - Yahoo! News (broken link)

Like I've been saying all along, due to the use of mass transit and economies of scale, living in the city is more eco-friendly than living in the country.

[Maine Writer]

Is this true when you look at the whole picture?

The smallest carbon footprint was in cities in the West and New England.

I'm a country bumpkin in New England. I feel better now.

[cancan]

this post is nonsense , devisive and incomplete.

wheres the carbon footprint of "city slickers" food production , of all the lights left burning in a city 24/7.....I could go on and on.

Are they speaking of "country bumpkins" that have invaded the rural areas from the city? I say they add to "city slickers" carbon foot print not country folk. people who live and work on a farm and dont drive 40 miles to work consume far less than city people.

does all this add up to green? wheres the animals , native plants and habitat in cities....destroyed. cities and there people pollute and consume. Vast vast majority of sewage treatment in american cities is broken and nobody wants to pay to fix them. suburban city slickers spray and fertilize to their hearts delight all contributing to runoff that kills waterways.

Green city slickers....give me a break.

[sponger42]

First off, I apologize if "country bumpkin" insulted anyone. It was used in jest, just like "city slicker." I've been both bumpkin and slicker (in that order).

Originally Posted by cancan

this post is nonsense , devisive and incomplete.

wheres the carbon footprint of "city slickers" food production , of all the lights left burning in a city 24/7.....I could go on and on.

Included in the study, did you follow the link at the bottom of the story?

Are they speaking of "country bumpkins" that have invaded the rural areas from the city? I say they add to "city slickers" carbon foot print not country folk. people who live and work on a farm and dont drive 40 miles to work consume far less than city people.

But a very small % of rural residents are farmers. A bigger % are commuting ex-slickers in the ex-urbs.

A dedicated conservationalist would probably have an easier time going "green" given 10 acres of land to work with. However, most rural residents are--as you point out--not dedicated conservationalists.

does all this add up to green? wheres the animals , native plants and habitat in cities....destroyed. cities and there people pollute and consume. Vast vast majority of sewage treatment in american cities is broken and nobody wants to pay to fix them. suburban city slickers spray and fertilize to their hearts delight all contributing to runoff that kills waterways.

Exactly. The majority of Suburban and ex-urban residents practice ecologically unsound living, meaning they are more damaging to the environment than concentrated urbanites. If everyone in the cities acted like the majority of rural residents, the damage to the environment would be far greater.

[groove1]

I know I was "greener" living in the city 3 miles away from work rather than 20 miles away in the burbs. I lived in an apartment and didnt have to drive far to get anywhere.

However, in the burbs, I don't have to worry so much about getting robbed or my house being broken in. I have always been environmentally aware, but when it comes to my personal safety versus the environment, the first one wins out by a long shot.

[mommabear2]

Well, when I lived in the midwest - in a tiny town - there wasn't a recycling center, there wasn't a separate recycling bin that came with the weekly waste disposal, there wasn't a green yard waste bin either, everyone commuted to either school or work (we had to), no mass transit whatsoever, 95% of the homes were huge (ours was a three story, not including the basement), BIG trucks were (and still are) "in"...

This was a while ago... heck it might have changed since I lived there. But I doubt it. My family members who live in rural areas don't even try to be green. I think it's too hard for them because their environment is not set up for it yet.

[groove1]

I live in semi-rural/suburban York County, Sc (Charlotte metro) and we do pretty good with recycling. Most residents are outside town limits so we either don't have public trash/recycling pickup or we have to pay for it from private companies, but we have two garbage/recycling centers nearby and they recycle almost everything.

[cancan]

ahh , well I dont call suburban people country...far from it. But I see what your saying. I may be a bit sensitive becuase I hear deragatory remarks about real country folks all the time. Real rural folks on farms , especially in the past were the original "green" people , before the age of plastics and modern conviences. Even half the people in real rural areas arent country folk now a days....at least in the east.

No offence takin.

[arctichomesteader]

Well, I'd say rural areas offer much more possibility when it comes to being "green" compared to cities. Whether or not this potential is fully developed could be another matter. Consider though, that some of the reasons a lot of rural people must commute to a job or city often, is city imposed/created; property taxes, for example, originated in (this country at least) cities, to fund public schools...and so you need income to pay those, as an example...and, of course, a lot of people go to the country, and try to live urban lifestyles, in the country...

[riveree]

Originally Posted by mommabear2

Well, when I lived in the midwest - in a tiny town - there wasn't a recycling center, there wasn't a separate recycling bin that came with the weekly waste disposal, there wasn't a green yard waste bin either, everyone commuted to either school or work (we had to), no mass transit whatsoever, 95% of the homes were huge (ours was a three story, not including the basement), BIG trucks were (and still are) "in"...

This was a while ago... heck it might have changed since I lived there. But I doubt it. My family members who live in rural areas don't even try to be green. I think it's too hard for them because their environment is not set up for it yet.

Whenever we drive out to the country to visit family, I often remark on how common it is for the people who live out there to clear the center of their land and plunk a house down on it - no garden in sight, no attempt to replant anything. So they buy all this acreage, but do nothing with it...they drive to the nearest city to buy their groceries instead of farming on their land. It's very curious .