A Finnish study finds that urban density and per capita GHG emissions are unrelated, which shatters some common asumptions. It’s income rather than density that is key – the richer you are, the higher your carbon footprint so, of course, a city where people are on average richer than a comparison city, will have a higher carbon footprint.
Heinonen J and Junnila S (2011). Implications of urban structure on carbon consumption in metropolitan areas Environ. Res. Lett. 6 014018 doi:10.1088/1748-9326/6/1/014018
Abstract
Urban structure influences directly or indirectly the majority of all green house gas (GHG) emissions in cities. The prevailing belief is that dense metropolitan areas produce less carbon emissions on a per capita basis than less dense surrounding rural areas. Consequently, density targets have a major role in low-carbon urban developments.
However, based on the results of this study, the connection seems unclear or even nonexistent when comprehensive evaluation is made. In this letter, we propose a hybrid life cycle assessment (LCA) method for calculating the consumption-based carbon footprints in metropolitan areas, i.e. carbon consumption, with the emphasis on urban structures.
The method is input–output-based hybrid LCA, which operates with the existing data from the region. The study is conducted by performing an analysis of the carbon consumption in two metropolitan areas in Finland, including 11 cities. Both areas consist of a dense city core and a less dense surrounding suburban area.
The paper will illustrate that the influence of urban density on carbon emissions is insignificant in the selected metropolitan areas. In addition, the utilized consumption-based method links the climate effects of city-level development to the global production of emissions.
A useful report on the paper can be found here
Post a new comment »