40 of the largest cities in the U.S. are actively engaged in reducing their carbon footprints, says the report "Green Cities." The report is based on conversations with leading thinkers and practitioners, says the non-profit, Living Cities, which produced it.
"Green Cities" looks at what cities have accomplished and identifies areas in which efforts are falling short. The cities that participated in the survey are: New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, Philadelphia, San Antonio, San Diego, Dallas, San Jose, Detroit, Jacksonville, San Francisco, Indianapolis, Columbus, Austin, Fort Worth, Memphis, Charlotte, Baltimore, Boston, El Paso, Milwaukee, Seattle, Nashville, Denver, Washington, D.C., Las Vegas, Louisville, Portland, Oklahoma City, Tucson, Albuquerque, Atlanta, Miami, Oakland, Minneapolis, Pittsburgh, Saint Paul, Cleveland.
The most concrete municipal commitment is the U.S. Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. As of April, 935 mayors representing more than 83.5 million citizens pledged to reduce greenhouse gases 7% from 1990 levels by 2012.
Where are cities excelling? An increasing number of cities are using green strategies to advance economic recovery efforts and create green jobs.
Where are cities falling short? They aren't yet connecting low-income people and under-invested urban communities to their greening efforts, which would allow them to build stronger communities for the long term. They are still focused on "top level" initiatives and need to start drilling down.
Urban officials surveyed by Living Cities say they've made significant progress in mandating more efficient city buildings, promoting recycling and conserving water. The more difficult areas to tackle actually have the greatest potential impact: expanding mass transit, promoting green jobs and improving the energy efficiency of existing building stock - ambitious projects that require large amounts of capital, and comprehensive economic and urban planning strategies that most cities have yet to adopt. They also require complex coordination with federal and state governments.
Relatively few cities are incorporating working families and poor people in their sustainability plans. New transit programs, such as rail lines and bike paths, tend to move residents from higher-income neighborhoods to the urban core. Few city officials talk about linking green job opportunities and the under- and unemployed.
This lack of attention is unfortunate, because the greening of cities offers a rare opportunity to address poverty and unemployment and it is precisely in low-income areas that sustainability plans can have the most dramatic impacts: The housing stock is the least energy efficient, and job seekers can often be trained to do green construction and retrofit work.
The most common green building strategy for cities, by far, is to mandate that new city buildings be built more efficiently. About two-thirds of cities mandate LEED Silver standards for new city-owned or city-funded construction.
Although this is a good first step, it results in little difference in terms of greenhouse gas emission reductions because few new city buildings are constructed each year. Research shows that retrofitting existing buildings has a far larger impact in reducing emissions that building new - even if it's built green. Construction itself is responsible for a big chunk of buildings' carbon emissions.
Even for those cities that have mandated new green buildings, it only applies to municipal buildings. Only 25% of cities have mandates that also apply to commercial construction, and just a few cities extend it to residential construction. San Francisco is phasing in mandates that apply to all kinds of construction over the next five years; Dallas and Washington D.C.'s mandates go into effect in 2011 and 2012, respectively.
The Report focuses on building energy retrofits, green workforce development and transit-oriented development, three areas that are priorities for local leaders and areas where stimulus funds are being directed.
