There's a philosophical debate about what is "sustainable." The two dominant camps tend to advocate on behalf of either the hyper efficient dense city or bucolic rural self sufficiency. Personally, I'm not a fan of either.
The more finely tuned and efficient any system is the more vulnerable it is to disruption. There's also an inevitable concentration of authority in large systems that doesn't appeal to me.
The picturesque farm out in the country has a romantic allure, but the reality is mostly isolation, lack of economic opportunity, and a stifling culture.
Almost all of the built environment in North America is actually suburban which is neither fish nor fowl in terms of the urban/rural divide. And that isn't going to change anytime soon.
At the moment suburbs have none of the efficiencies of the urban core and none of the productive capacity of the countryside. Suburban residents are just as dependent on large centralized systems as people living downtown. Where does suburban food come from? Energy? Water? Where does suburban trash go? Sewerage? Who owns everything? (If you have a mortgage… the bank, not you.) A small family farm in the country can manage all these things right at home on a tight budget. But the average tract house is no different from a high rise apartment.
That private vehicle that sits in the driveway appears to be a source of personal freedom unlike the city bus or subway. But the car is invisibly tethered to gas stations, pipelines, refineries, and ultimately to the oil fields of North Dakota, Venezuela, and Nigeria by way of massive corporations and no small amount of Big Government. Wall Street also finances these cars as well, so add that to the mix of dependencies. Suburbanites believe they're more independent than city people. They aren't.
Historically this tension between efficient urbanism and rural productivity was resolved by building compact medium density towns that were immediately surrounded by farmland. Economic opportunity, high culture, and great efficiencies were baked in to every level of the built environment. Take a fifteen minute walk from the center of town and you'll find water, grain, grazing livestock, orchards, and all other essentials for supporting the population. A two thousand year old settlement like this one in Spain demonstrates pretty clearly that this is a sustainable model. But how does it relate to American suburbs?
The typical suburban home is surrounded by a modest patch of garden. Instead of growing a lawn (the largest single crop in North America) the land could be producing fresh food. Ornamental shrubs and specimen trees could just as easily be fruit bearing. No need to truck in refrigerated lettuce from 1,500 miles away. The supply chain is effectively reduced to a matter of feet. There's no need for battery hens from a distant factory farm. This transforms a consumptive landscape into a productive property. No one is suggesting this is "self sufficient". But it's a huge step up from having a kitchen full of Lean Cuisine, Fruit Loops, and Go-Gurt from the supermarket.
In addition to home gardens suburbia is full of places that can be transformed into community gardens. Every church, school, and vacant parking lot is a potential veggie patch or orchard.
This solar water heater is the biggest bang for the green buck. A couple of tanks, some black boxes covered in glass, a little pump… and you've got free hot water for decades. The cheapest and greenest energy is always the power you don't need to use in the first place.
A modest number of photovoltaic panels can often provide nearly all the electricity for a suburban home, particularly if the house was first fitted with high efficiency lights and appliances. Combine this with loads of insulation, solar hot water, and a food garden and a suburban home begins to resemble a small family homestead in the country.
The weakest aspect of suburbia has always been the impoverishment of the public realm. Suburbs are first and foremost about private space. In order to become more vibrant parts of the suburbs need to be activated with shared community spaces. These strip mall parking lot cafes may not resemble Paris, but they do the job in a straightforward cost effective manner. The food is good. The company is pleasant. Commerce and culture can start to take baby steps. If many more such places are allowed to gradually evolve and connect they might eventually turn in to something more refined and dynamic.
There will always be people who prefer to drive no matter what. And the suburbs do provide serious challenges when it comes to alternative forms of mobility. Public transit rarely works well in dispersed sprawling environments. Honestly, I don't think it's worth even trying to serve most suburban neighborhoods with transit. But knitting together the viable parts of suburbia with bike infrastructure is so incredibly cheap that it's worth doing in places where people value the option. Most folks may still drive, but they may not need to do it nearly as often if walking and biking are at least reasonable options.
While I'm at it, I'd like to describe what isn't sustainable. Massive solar arrays on suburban rooftops appear to be a step in the right direction. But look closer. This homeowner could have installed far fewer panels and spent the remaining money on added insulation and energy efficiency instead. But being frugal and productive was never really the goal here.
Next to the sterile lawn are all sorts of toys that run on liquid fuels. I'm not saying people shouldn't have playthings. I'm saying these items are expensive and disposable and were almost certainly bought on credit. The extended cab pick up truck has never seen a sheet of plywood, an eight foot length of pipe, or a bale of hay. It's sport. Not utility. The speed boat isn't exactly built for fishing. This is standard suburban debt and consumption. It's fragile and unlikely to hold up well over the long haul.
Some good thoughts here, both in the post and the comments.
Hi Johnny, I watched Kirsten's video regarding your "garage" home. I resonate with your approach to housing, consumption and time. In fact I am soon to begin building a 700 square foot house in Tasmania, Australia. I am curious to know, do you still live in the same house? Have you extended it?
The Hawaii cottage has been given various small upgrades and furniture changes over the years, but remains pretty much the same. I never lived in Hawaii full time. The cottage has always been a vacation home and a possible retirement destination.
I like this. You've been promoting this suburban homesteading idea as a viable future for suburbs for a bit now and I see it as an option, even if most suburbanites don't yet.
I tend to think suburbia will move in two directions — the homesteading, more independent, quasi-rural future you suggest, but also a more urbanized future for some. I think economic and/or social disruption will cause the change, but access to the city will define the path each suburb will take. Those with decent public transit, commuter transit or even interstate highway access to the city will probably choose the urbanizing path, while those without that will take the homesteading path.
In either case, contemporary suburbia doesn't stay the same.
Exactly. People often comment that suburbanites are just too busy commuting to work and driving their kids around to grow a garden. Supermarket food is ridiculously cheap. Energy is just too cheap to worry about conservation or home generation. I reply… Sure, at the moment that's true. At the moment. Give it thirty years. Urbanization of the suburbs is already underway in many locations. De facto ruralization (contraction) is already underway in other locations. All in good time my pretty. All in good time.
Thanks for the link. Cool video. I'll have to take a trip out there and do a blog post on the project as it moves forward. Stay tuned.
The office parks, shopping malls, and tract homes of San Ramon are 1) Some of the best examples of this kind of high value suburban development in the outer Bay Area and 2) My idea of Hell.
Renzo Piano does great work. It looks like his proposed piazza will be a breathtaking combination of Renaissance Italy and an American parking deck. It's better than a surface parking lot for sure. But it may turn out to be one of those upscale lifestyle centers that suburbanites complain about because they don't like the added density, but city people hate because it's still a soulless office park with some shops hot glued to the edges. Perhaps this kind of thing is one of many intermediate steps that might eventually mature into a great place over another century. Florence, Sienna, and Venice weren't built in a single generation either.
The problem with sustainable lifestyles is they are work. In most households, both adults work outside jobs with some sort of commute. When they get home they have their child/children in every sport/club imaginable. They are very busy and don't want to grow their own food. It is easier to get fast food or package meals. The American lifestyle would require a huge change to become more sustainable.
All true at the moment. But keep in mind, the whole thing about an unsustainable arrangement is that sooner or later it won't be sustained – the system will crash. At that point people will have no choice but to reinvent how everything is organized. I suspect this will play out differently in different locations over a long period of time. How did your great grandparents live compared to your current lifestyle? People adjust based on changing circumstances.
Great article, having lived in a more rural traditional (farming) community, with a town less than 5 miles away (bikeable) and can attest that in the right place you will find much of the vibe of the city happening just a bike ride away, yes the choice is much reduced, but often that's a good thing. What would happen in an extended crash, to everyone who has little equity in their mortgage, will they even still own their own homes, and then make the transition to a more sustainable suburb? IF the world had time, to get the accommodation issue on a more solid basis (20 years of large mortgage installments?), then maybe the utopian vision you portrayed would be viable.
I'm not big on utopian visions. Necessity will push things in one direction or another over time. The most likely catalyst will be political and economic upheaval – probably in the form of war that will disrupt supply chains etc. Every few generations the slate is wiped clean and things are reset at a different level with new rules.
Next Next post: Who Really Controls Which House You Buy?