Chem321:Discussion 13

THE SUSTAINABLE WORLD (Chemistry 321)
MAIN PAGE
Syllabus — Schedule
Welcome page Contact Dr. Walker
This week
Today's tasks — (tomorrow)
Course units 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14
Moodle site
Course content
Assignments Paper - Acme - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 Final exam - Practice final
Practice problems
Discussions
General wiki help
Basic editing Create an account Protocols Tutorial Demo, for practice

You have a lot of work going on, so this discussion is straightforward.

Dream a little! Imagine a world in the year 2065 where society has successfully made a switch to sustainable living. What would a sustainable city look like? How about a sustainable small town? A self-sustaining Mars colony? Describe some details/specific features you would expect to see. You can assume that technology has made major developments that can be extrapolated from today, but we will not consider major disruptive changes such as the Singularity which are hard to predict & assess. I recommend completing Unit 14 before posting.

Post an answer by 11:59pm on Wednesday, August 5th, 2015. Then post one followup comment on another student's answer by noon on Friday, August 7th, 2015.

Alexander Levitz

• In the absence of any catastrophic events that could cripple development (e.g. wars, natural disasters, etc.), our world will look drastically different by 2065, especially if we embrace sustainable development. Firstly, our population will seemingly continue to grow at an excessive rate, which will certainly influence how we progress with the development of our cities. For example, in NYC both the Brooklyn and Manhattan skylines have changed significantly within the past ten years (I have witnessed this from my roof), in that there have been numerous new high-rise constructions (and the new trend, i.e. “pencil skyscrapers”). The growing trend is to increase the population density, thereby necessitating the replacement of various smaller buildings. Thus, by 2065 there will certainly be vastly more high-rise buildings, and a much higher population density in cities. The actual buildings will be incredibly efficient, and will most likely be able to generate most if not all of their energy requirements. This will likely be attained through photovoltaic devices, such as the conventional solar panels on rooftops, but also with transparent photovoltaic “windows” (which maximizes the solar energy production capacity of buildings). There will also hopefully be other various renewable energy sources incorporated into these futuristic buildings, such as more efficient and appropriate wind energy devices (e.g. like the wind tower in Masdar city). Transportation within cities will also improve, with a greater emphasis on public transportation, and radically different personal commuter devices (e.g. the SoloWheel, which is an intriguing self-balancing unicycle Segway commuter). In terms of our usage of matter, it will hopefully no longer be a linear flow, and it will be cyclic with recycling being the last resort. Products will hopefully have longer lifespans, and companies and consumers will change their behaviors (eliminating overconsumption, and the concept of built in obsolescence). Thus, cities will experience immense changes that will completely revamp the cityscapes that we have become accustomed to.

Small towns will certainly experience considerable growth, however, I feel that a self-sustaining Mars colony will not really be feasible by 2065. I think that interplanetary (as well as asteroid) mining and resource acquisition ventures will be a reality, but I am skeptical that an actual “space-city” will be a possibility by 2065 (maybe some sort of space station that is the size of a town, like The Ark in the show The 100). Small towns will change significantly in a number of ways. For example, they will likely all be powered by sustainable microgrids, and most of the houses that surround these towns will likely be off the grid. The surrounding areas of these towns will be more pertinent in the future, as these are the agricultural production areas, which will have to successfully and sustainably produce food for significantly more people (which will of course depend on the ability to greatly increase the yields per given area of land, most likely through genetic modifications). Therefore, both cities and towns will change considerably, however, I think more time is required before we will have “space-cities” and hover cars (like in the show Futurama). Alexanderlevitz (talk) 20:35, 5 August 2015 (EDT)

• I have to agree on you with the small towns being powered by microgrids, this would be an efficient way to power small towns that don't need large amounts of power such as big cities. I also believe that 2065 is too short of a time frame to make it to Mars and create a colony, we should rather focus on creating a better planet earth and using our resources sustainably. Rodrigaf197 (talk) 12:32, 7 August 2015 (EDT)

• Thanks for your vision! But aren't we supposed to have flying cars?! We were supposed to get those by 2000! More seriously, I especially like your vision of the small towns being self-sufficient in energy and food. In the question I only meant a starting Mars colony equivalent to Roanoke or Plymouth - perhaps 100 people at most, as I agree a space city is very unlikely. Martin A. Walker (talk) 14:58, 7 August 2015 (EDT)

Triston Riley

I imagine that in 2065 the world will indeed be a much different place, and a place where everything we do is in a sustainable manner, and any resources we use will be renewable. I also would like to think that by then we will have a colony on mars that is also self sustaining. This would be an amazing thing to be accomplished by people, and a way to really prove how we have mastered being sustainable. I think all cities will be modeled after the new city of Melbourne where everything will be self sufficient sustainable, and green. I think this will be a amazing thing to see, everyone will need to work together to achieve this goal, making the world a better place. Rileytc197 (talk) 12:27, 3 August 2015 (EDT)

• So you would follow the Melbourne example? What specifics do you like about the Melbourne model that you would like to see replicated elsewhere? Martin A. Walker (talk) 13:01, 3 August 2015 (EDT)

I would like to see multiple aspects of the Melbourne model implemented in the new cities of the future. First I would for sure like to see the big public transport network, and lots of things that are walkable of each other. these two things would cut down greatly on the CO2 emissions due to cars. I would also like to see the city wide usage of recycling programs and increased education of how to properly recycle. Finally I would like to see the usage of the water catchment and usage of storm waters in the city to help cut down there using of natural spring and ground water, or fresh water lakes. Rileytc197 (talk) 19:22, 3 August 2015 (EDT)

• Thanks for the clarification. I think cities like Melbourne and Portland, that are intentionally trying to blaze a trail in sustainability, will be able to serve as powerful examples for other cities to follow. Other places are doing the same at the small-town level, too. These examples can be very influential and -if they're successful (which I think many are) - can help to discredit the naysayers who say we have to do things the old way. I especially like the water idea, as water is a major problem in much of Australia now, with places like the Murray river (just west of Melbourne) running out of water. Martin A. Walker (talk) 14:58, 7 August 2015 (EDT)

Alexane Rodrigue

In 50 years, I believe a self sustaining city would be built in a way that makes everything accessible and in walking distance. Homes and buildings will be built with solar panels and wind turbines, and will be insulated to increase home heating efficiency. The city would be designed in way that promotes riding a bicycle as means of commuting to work, I know Montreal makes this effort by having bike lanes, and bikes parked on the side of the road for rent. There would also be transportation in the form of energy efficient railways that are set up all over the country to allow for fast and efficient travel of long distances. As for manufacturers, they would all need to create greener process that produce no waste, or find ways so that waste can be a feedstock for another process. Recycling infrastructure would be in place to allow for this, and products will be made durable and environmentally friendly. Full cost accounting would be mandatory, and this would allow the green industry to flourish. The use of fossil fuels will be decreased, and it will become costly to continue using them. Cars would all be replaced with hydrogen fuel cell cars, and gas stations replaced will charging stations that utilize renewable energy as fuel. Rodrigaf197 (talk) 17:05, 5 August 2015 (EDT)

• I am a big fan of creating bike friendly cities, and have personally witnessed an incredible amount of progress in NYC (I have abandoned using public transportation, and have been commuting with my bike for the past 8 years)! For example, there are many more protected bike lanes, as well as the new Citi Bike program (which I helped advertise for at their initial launch with my cousin's guerrilla marketing firm). I also love what they have done in Montreal (the Citi Bike equivalent), which allowed me to easily tour the city on a bicycle (without emitting any carbon)! I also think it is a great idea to replace all of the gas stations with renewable energy charging stations (kind of life the Tesla supercharger stations). Alexanderlevitz (talk) 16:34, 6 August 2015 (EDT)

• Transportation is a major issue, and many modern cities are designed around the car, esp. in North America, but this creates places that are unfriendly and contain fractured communities. If you design your city to make it sustainable and "livable" (as Melbourne seeks to do) so that you can walk or bike between places more easily, it becomes a lot friendlier as a place to live. Public transportation is extremely efficient at moving large numbers of people around at low cost, and it's tragic that many cities lost what was a good infrastructure of trams and trains. (Remember, most Americans used to use public transportation all the time.) In my home city of Newcastle, they built a new Metro system in the late 70s-80s, and when the first line opened they reckoned it removed about 50,000 cars from the roads. They also reckoned it saved 1-2 million pounds (about 0.5% of the building costs) in healthcare costs because of fewer injuries from car accidents! Martin A. Walker (talk) 14:58, 7 August 2015 (EDT)

Jillian Visser

The world in the year 2065 will be drastically different and I am hoping it will be for the better! If we have made a successful switch to sustainable development then we will see cities and small towns utilizing the power of renewable resources in even more innovative ways then we already presently see today. We will have different modes of transportation using solar and hydrogen power. We will see buildings utilizing solar power and "green" design features. We will see products designed and constructed based on green chemistry/design principles. There will be more technology designed to harness the power of the wind, waves, and sun. Chemistry will be helpful in producing more efficient fuels for us to use to power our vehicles and buildings. Major developments usually occur faster when there is a crisis or a tragedy that happens, but I hope that will not be the source of the changes we will see. I am hoping our future holds great possibilities because we as a people see a need for a change in how we interact with the world that we live in. We need to realize that nature's forces can be helpful and that if we do not accept it's help it will eventually get mad and fight back! Climate change is a real thing and more major natural disasters are occurring including: earthquakes, violent tornadoes and thunderstorms, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions. Just as we have had to develop new technology and designs to answer to our natural disasters, we will have to find solutions to answer this growing problem of global warming and climate change!

• I think it will for sure be cool to see how things change by 2065, if things are like you say and we actually make changes for the better this world will be a truly amazing place to be in.

We as a people can only ignore the signs for so long that we need to change our ways before we finally will. Rileytc197 (talk) 12:18, 6 August 2015 (EDT)

• You're right that the consequences of 'not moving in this direction are not simply dirty, unfriendly, expensive cities & towns, but we will be living with the consequences of climate change and the human (and natural) catastrophe that follows. I doubt the road ahead will be all rosy, but I also am hopeful that we won't reduce the world to nuclear dust or a baking climate with destroyed ecosystems. In the C20th we learnt how to reduce many other types of pollution and we avoided the loss of the ozone layer; the present challenges are greater, but so are our resources and our knowledge. I hope that chemistry can help in making the world better, not worse! Martin A. Walker (talk) 15:11, 7 August 2015 (EDT)