Fair and Fault

What? And suburbia/exurbia which is wholy an American creation born of the American love of the road and driving is somehow better and will be self sufficient? Or the isolation of rural life in which nothing is promised but the slow death as people succumb to a lack of medicine and what had been easily preventable diseases.

Taking this view point, we're all damned and doomed. It's just a matter of when, not if.

I don't think that's what he's saying. He's saying that the reason we changed to cities rather than lots of little settlements was because the energy let us. Now that that energy has gone, there's little we can do to keep the old power-hungry life going. We have to change back to the old way of doing things , otherwise yes, we are all damned and doomed. It's a call to action. If we can make the sacrifice and the change, we will be ok.

-Mia

exactly mia

To an extent I suppose. Historically both Baltimore and Philly (to be east coast centric for the moment) were indeed much smaller than they currently are. Both cities have expanded over time to incorporate the smaller outlaying districts that had been plantations/warehouses/ironworks/residental/whatever.

Both however were also historically ports of call (Baltimore for being the western most port of the US + sheltered harbor, Philly for its coal/iron and access through the Appalachians).

But anyhow, even assuming we move closer to a barter system than currency, I'd expect cities to have to adapt back to their roots of providing a trading hub (as opposed to the shift towards information centers). Even assuming we moved closer to a barter system, I'd expect certain luxuries to still be in vogue - citrus, spices (salt, pepper, and sugar), coffee, tea, etc. Even with the expense of the past these 'basic' items were in high demand during the 19th century in which the only energy we made use of for transportion was wind.

So to go back to your point, I agree that yes, cities must adapt.

Running with your scenario for the moment now would be the time to re-implement/invigorate the infrastructure to provide shipping with the idea that any shipping must be done with declining oil reserves and capacity. Doing this as a large scale public works project for the city in question would probably be a good idea.

I'm tempted to say on a federal level increasing the subsidization of solar energy panels would be good for both rural and urban homes, but the problem is that it's not going to work unless people dramatically cut their power usage. http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/bal-te.md.amish18may18,0,4419727.story?coll=bal-home-headlines has an interesting article about solar panels. But this quote sums up the problem - Most Amish people hook up only one or two panels -- or at most 10 -- compared with the 40 or 60 it would take to keep a typical American home running.

Or, put it another way - http://www.howstuffworks.com/question418.htm has it estimated that the average American home would require 285 sq ft of panels to generate sufficient electricity which will cost roughly $16K to implement. Not cheap.

suburbia is beyond it carrying capacity by design, but not in fact. removing the low-density housing and creating high density housing with surrounding fields is possible. as mia said, little settlements are possible and are their only future. yes the 'burbs are a purely american development. thats why europe and other places that didn't adopt our car culture wholesale will be better off. and the isolation of rural life, with its lack of medicine isn't so bad, read "The Human Zoo", less stress, better food, lower morbidity.

WTF?

I'm sorry, but I am this close --> || to flipping out at the next person who tries passing that "cities are unsustainable" line.

Listen, bub, cities were doing fine before oil, and they'll do fine well into the future without oil. Heck, the last 60 years with oil have been nothing but a continuous dose of urban poison. Witness my hometown, Philadelphia. Our population peaked in 1950, just as car culture really started taking off. 2.07 million people lived here, then. Since then, our population has slid continuously; the 2005 estimate was 1.46 million. Of the 10 largest cities in 1950, only New York and LA would ever record higher populations. (Well, the Inky says we might be close in 2010, what with the way we're so crowded now.) And yeah, that did a number on our economy, especially when the ones who left were richer than the ones who stayed. Oh, and none of us were exactly starving in the streets in 1949, either.

You got a beef, take it up with the idiot exurbanites, the ones that ditched the cities to pave over every farm within a hour's driving time. You're a farmer? The cities are here making sure that, when your tractor breaks, there are parts to fix it. We're also here to make sure you don't freeze to death come winter. (Oh, by the way, how is living alone out in the boonies gonna help you with that? That's what I thought.)

Fair and fault may not matter anymore, but it's still possible to sound like a jerk. Please don't. I've put up with enough people saying I live in Sodom and Gomorrah on the Delaware for one lifetime already, and if the last three months have taught us anything, it's that patience is a finite resource.

Re: WTF?

as i said, its not you personally, its the arrangement. yes, i may have sounded like a jerk and for that i apologize. still the inescapable fact is, our cities no longer produce essential goods. even the very small town (pop 1700) where i live had its canning operation packed up and moved to South America. and at one time it produced 50% of Americas supply of that particular product.

the tractor parts are no longer made in our cities, sometimes they are shipped though them from smaller towns, or from overseas but when push comes to shove we make do with whats on hand.

we heat with wood, cut with german chainsaws, split with chinese mauls, and burned in old american woodstoves. we do pull it out of the mountains in american trucks, though that will have to change. (felling saws, axes, and ox wagons)

so, sorry you feel beset upon, i have nothing against Baltimore in particular, from the beginning of the post i've said, its the arrangement.
do some hunting around Baltimore and find something produced there that is essential and i'll be the first to suggest it be sustained. however there is nothing that your neighbor, DC, could produce that would induce me to bring a wagon load of grain there.