Cities Built on Fertile Lands Affect Climate

Devar writes "While cities provide vital habitat for human beings to thrive, it appears U.S. cities have been built on the most fertile soils, lessening contributions of these lands to Earth's food web and human agriculture, according to a study by NASA researchers and others. Though cities account for just 3 percent of continental U.S. land area, the food and fiber that could be grown there rivals current production on all U.S. agricultural lands, which cover 29 percent of the country. Studies like this one may lead to smarter urban-growth strategies in the future."

Comments

Smarter Urban-Growth?

[cornice]

Studies like this one may lead to smarter urban-growth strategies in the future.

Right. In most places people know about smarter growth strategies. Rarely does growth hinge on anything but the perceived path toward the greatest short term wealth growth for the land owner. I'm guessing that maximization of soil production will be secondary to air quality, traffic, and many other concerns.

Re:Smarter Urban-Growth?

[Rick the Red]

Near where I live is a fertile valley, which is now mostly paved over with a sea of warehouses. Meanwhile, the hills on either side of the valley are largely undeveloped. Why? Because it's cheaper to build in the valley and ship in food from elsewhere than it is to build in the hills and grow food locally.

Recently, the last agricultural business in the area -- a dairy -- was shut down because cow poop was getting into the river. Never mind the oil and gasoline run-off from the sea of asphault all around the dairy.

Oh, and where does our food come from? South America and the irrigated deserts of California. Los Angeles can't get enough drinking water; they're draining the Colorado River dry before it reaches the sea, and still they can't get enough water. Yet they grow rice in the desert!

And we wonder why the rest of the world thinks we're idiots.

Paulo Soleri

[AtariAmarok]

Check into Paul Soleri. He proposed high-density small-footprint city-buildings called "arcologies". His books even show how little room a city like L.A. would take if it were built as an arcology.

It does not seem feasible at this time: the one in the link above is very small and is being built at a snail's pace. Arcologies of the scale Soleri has envisioned have only appeared in the fiction Larry Niven has done in collaboration with other authors. ("Oath of Fealty" and the Dream Park novels)

Re:Paulo Soleri

[Dachannien]

...And in the movie Blade Runner. And in the game SimCity 2000. And in the Shadowrun RPG.

I really do wish that arcologies would catch on. The environmental impact of having the day commutes of tens of thousands of people reduced to a ride in an electric-powered mass transit shuttle - which people would have to use because there would be no room for cars inside the building - would be tremendous, especially when multiplied by a few hundred arcologies.

The only thing to consider is whether the fertile lands mentioned in the above article are reclaimable, or whether enough environmental damage has been done to them to make them no longer very fertile.

Who cares...

[Dr. Bent]

The last time I checked, the US government still pays people NOT to grow food because we have more than we need. When farm subsidies disappear, then I'll start worrying about urban sprawl affecting crop production.

The problem of world hunger cannot simply be solved by producing more food. You have to get that food to whoever needs it, before it spoils, and in a way that is cost effective. That's a much more difficult problem than just growing more corn.