Support Grist
Support nonprofit, independent environmental journalism.
Donate to Grist.
Main Dish

15 Green Cities


19 Jul 2007
Tools: print | email | discuss | write to the editor | subscribe | RSS
These metropolises aren't literally the greenest places on earth -- they're not necessarily dense with foliage, for one, and some still have a long way to go down the path to sustainability. But all of the cities on this list deserve recognition for making impressive strides toward eco-friendliness, helping their many millions of residents live better, greener lives. If your favorite green city didn't make the list, tell us why it deserves recognition in the comments section at the bottom of the page.

1
Rekyjavik, Iceland
Photo: iStockphoto
Reykjavik, Iceland
Remember the grade-school memory device "Greenland is icy and Iceland is green"? It's truer than ever thanks to progress made by Iceland and its capital city in recent years. Reykjavik has been putting hydrogen buses on its streets, and, like the rest of the country, its heat and electricity come entirely from renewable geothermal and hydropower sources and it's determined to become fossil-fuel-free by 2050. The mayor has pledged to make Reykjavik the cleanest city in Europe. Take that, Greenland.
 
2
Portland, Oregon
Photo: StuSeeger via Flickr
Portland, Oregon, U.S.
The City of Roses' approach to urban planning and outdoor spaces has often earned it a spot on lists of the greenest places to live. Portland is the first U.S. city to enact a comprehensive plan to reduce CO2 emissions and has aggressively pushed green building initiatives. It also runs a comprehensive system of light rail, buses, and bike lanes to help keep cars off the roads, and it boasts 92,000 acres of green space and more than 74 miles of hiking, running, and biking trails.
 
3
Curitiba, Brazil
Photo: evil empire via Flickr
Curitiba, Brazil
With citizens riding a bus system hailed as one of the world's best and with municipal parks benefiting from the work of a flock of 30 lawn-trimming sheep, this midsized Brazilian city has become a model for other metropolises. About three-quarters of its residents rely on public transport, and the city boasts over 580 square feet of green space per inhabitant. As a result, according to one survey, 99 percent of Curitibans are happy with their hometown.
 
4
Malmö, Sweden
Photo: Photomath? via Flickr
Malmö, Sweden
Known for its extensive parks and green space, Sweden's third-largest city is a model of sustainable urban development. With the goal of making Malmö an "ekostaden" (eco-city), several neighborhoods have already been transformed using innovative design and are planning to become more socially, environmentally, and economically responsive. Two words, Malmö: organic meatballs.
 
5
Vancouver, Canada
Photo: iStockphoto
Vancouver, Canada
Its dramatic perch between mountains and sea makes Vancouver a natural draw for nature lovers, and its green accomplishments are nothing to scoff at either. Drawing 90 percent of its power from renewable sources, British Columbia's biggest city has been a leader in hydroelectric power and is now charting a course to use wind, solar, wave, and tidal energy to significantly reduce fossil-fuel use. The metro area boasts 200 parks and over 18 miles of waterfront, and has developed a way-forward-thinking 100-year plan for sustainability. Assuming civilization will last another 100 years? Priceless.
 
6
Copenhagen, Denmark
Photo: iStockphoto
Copenhagen, Denmark
With a big offshore wind farm just beyond its coastline and more people on bikes than you can shake a stick at, Copenhagen is a green dream. The city christened a new metro system in 2000 to make public transit more efficient. And it recently won the European Environmental Management Award for cleaning up public waterways and implementing holistic long-term environmental planning. Plus, the pastries? Divine.
 
7
London, England
Photo: iStockphoto
London, England
When Mayor Ken Livingstone unveiled London's Climate Change Action Plan in February, it was just the latest step in his mission to make his city the world's greenest. Under the plan, London will switch 25 percent of its power to locally generated, more-efficient sources, cut CO2 emissions by 60 percent within the next 20 years, and offer incentives to residents who improve the energy efficiency of their homes. The city has also set stiff taxes on personal transportation to limit congestion in the central city, hitting SUVs heavily and letting electric vehicles and hybrids off scot-free.
8
San Francisco, California
Photo: iStockphoto
San Francisco, California, U.S.
Nearly half of all 'Friscans take public transit, walk, or bike each day, and over 17 percent of the city is devoted to parks and green space. San Francisco has also been a leader in green building, with more than 70 projects registered under the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED certification system. In 2001, San Francisco voters approved a $100 million bond initiative to finance solar panels, energy efficiency, and wind turbines for public facilities. The city has also banned non-recyclable plastic bags and plastic kids' toys laced with questionable chemicals. Next thing you know, they'll all be wearing flowers in their hair.
 
9
Bahía de Caráquez, Ecuador
After it suffered severe damage from natural disasters in the late 1990s, the Bahía de Caráquez government and nongovernmental organizations working in the area forged a plan to rebuild the city to be more sustainable. Declared an "Ecological City" in 1999, it has since developed programs to protect biodiversity, revegetate denuded areas, and control erosion. The city, which is marketing itself as a destination for eco-tourists, has also begun composting organic waste from public markets and households and supporting organic agriculture and aquaculture.
 
10
Sydney, Australia
Photo: Elfike via Flickr
Sydney, Australia
The Land Down Under was the first country to put the squeeze on inefficient, old-school light bulbs, but Sydney-dwellers took things a step further in March, hosting a city-wide one-hour blackout to raise awareness about global warming. Add to that their quest for carbon neutrality, innovative food-waste disposal program, and new Green Square, and you've got a metropolis well on its way to becoming the Emerald City of the Southern Hemisphere.
 
11
Barcelona, Spain
Photo: iStockphoto
Barcelona, Spain
Hailed for its pedestrian-friendliness (37 percent of all trips are taken on foot!), promotion of solar energy, and innovative parking strategies, Barcelona is creating a new vision for the future in Europe. City leaders' urban-regeneration plan also includes poverty reduction and investment in neglected areas, demonstrating a holistic view of sustainability.
 
12
Bogotá, Colombia
Photo: iStockphoto
Bogotá, Colombia
In a city known for crime and slums, one mayor led a crusade against cars that has helped to make Bogotá one of the most accessible and sustainable cities in the Western Hemisphere. Enrique Peñalosa, mayor from 1998 to 2001, used his time in office to create a highly efficient bus transit system, reconstruct sidewalks so pedestrians could get around safely, build more than 180 miles of bike trails, and revitalize 1,200 city green spaces. He restricted car use on city streets during rush hour, cutting peak-hour traffic 40 percent, and raised the gas tax. The city also started an annual "car-free day," and aims to eliminate personal car use during rush hour completely by 2015. Unthinkable!
 
13
Bangkok, Thailand
Photo: iStockphoto
Bangkok, Thailand
Once known for smokestacks, smog, and that unshakeable '80s song, Bangkok has big plans for a brighter future. City Governor Apirak Kosayodhin recently announced a five-year green strategy, which includes efforts to recycle citizens' used cooking oil to make biodiesel, reduce global-warming emissions from vehicles, and make city buildings more efficient. Bangkok has also made notable progress in tackling air pollution over the past decade. Though the city's pollution levels are still higher than some of its big-city Asian counterparts, its progress thus far is impressive.
 
14
Kampala, Uganda
Photo: iStockphoto
Kampala, Uganda
This capital city is overcoming the challenges faced by many urban areas in developing countries. Originally built on seven hills, Kampala takes pride in its lush surroundings, but it is also plagued by big-city ills of poverty and pollution. Faced with the "problem" of residents farming within city limits, the city passed a set of bylaws supporting urban agriculture that revolutionized not only the local food system, but also the national one, inspiring the Ugandan government to adopt an urban-ag policy of its own. With plans to remove commuter taxis from the streets, establish a traffic-congestion fee, and introduce a comprehensive bus service, Kampala is on its way to becoming a cleaner, safer, more sustainable place to live.
 
15
Austin, Texas
Photo: iStockphoto
Austin, Texas, U.S.
Austin is poised to become the No. 1 solar manufacturing center in the U.S., and its hometown utility, Austin Energy, has given the notion of pulling power from the sun a Texas-sized embrace. The city is on its way to meeting 20 percent of its electricity needs through the use of renewables and efficiency by 2020. Austin also devotes 15 percent of its land to parks and other open spaces, boasts 32 miles of bike trails, and has an ambitious smart-growth initiative, making it a happy green nook in what's widely perceived as a not-so-green state. To put it mildly.
 

Runners-up


Chicago, IL
Photo: racingsquirrel via Flickr
Chicago, Illinois, U.S.
Mayor Richard M. Daley (D) is striving to make his hometown "the greenest city in America." There's lots of literal greenery: under his leadership, Chicago has planted 500,000 new trees, invested hundreds of millions of dollars in the revitalization of parks and neighborhoods, and added more than 2 million square feet of rooftop gardens, more than all other U.S. cities combined. And there's plenty of metaphorical greening too: the Windy City has built some of the most eco-friendly municipal buildings in the country, been a pioneer in municipal renewable-energy standards, provided incentives for homeowners to be more energy efficient, and helped low-income families get solar power.


Freiburg, Germany
Freiburg, Germany
Home to the famously car-free Vauban neighborhood and a number of eco-transit innovations, Freiburg is a tourist destination with a green soul. The city has also long embraced solar power.


Seattle, WA
Photo: Piero Sierra via Flickr
Seattle, Washington, U.S.
Mayor Greg Nickels (D) has committed his city to meeting the emission-reduction goals of the Kyoto climate treaty, and inspired more than 590 other U.S. mayors to do the same. True to its name, the Emerald City is also planting trees, building green, and benefiting from biodiesel and hybrid buses.


Quebec City, Canada
Photo: Hourman via Flickr
Quebec City, Canada
Dubbed the most sustainable city in Canada by the Corporate Knights Forum, Quebec wins big points for clean water, good waste management, and bike paths aplenty. C'est magnifique!



Did your hometown make the cut? Should it have? Tell us in comments below.

Kate Sheppard contributed to this list.

Tools: print | email | discuss | write to the editor | subscribe | RSS
< Previous | Next >
Comments: (50 comments)

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Username: Password:

Forgot your password? Enter your username and click:

Greenwashing Daley

Two articles below support show that further references to Mayor Daley of Chicago being green is a classic case of greenwashing:

Daley's city not so 'green'
By Michael Hawthorne Tribune staff reporter June 18, 2007  p.1
http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2007/06/18/2719505.htm

Daley's 20% green-power goal for 2006? In reality, not 1 watt
by Michael Hawthorne, Chicago Tribune Nov. 20, 2006, p.1
http://www.airpollutionnews.com/2006/11/20/7612/daleys-20 ...

Iceland Hydrogen Phase Out

I was just in Iceland and I heard that they are going to get rid of their fuel cell buses now that the grant money is gone.  They are switching to landfill methane, so at least it's not all bad.

Hydropower ain't green (15 greenest cities)

You mention that Vancouver is a green city partly because it gets electricity from hydropower.  While small-scale hydro may be an exception, as a rule, hydropower is anything but green. Dams kill rivers dead, along with the fish and plants that depend on natural, free-flowing rivers.  And hyrdo in Canada's boreal forest is an environmental disaster -- flooding enormous areas of forest, ending their carbon capture and killing their wildlife.

vancouver

Vancouver is beautiful, but the last I heard they were still planning to stop dumping all their considerable gallons of raw sewage into the puget sound and contaminating all those wonderful beaches and ocean life.  If so, how could they be listed so high on the green city list- unless it is bluegreen???

New York City is easily the U.S.'s greenest...

...because of the subway system and bus system.  According to the U.S. statistical abstract, page 37, in 2003 38% of all transit ridership in the U.S. occurred in the NYC area, 7% in Chicago, and 5% in SF.  Austin Texas, number 15 on this list, had less than 1% of transit ridership.  It's ridiculous not to include transit ridership in these rankings.

Sydney green? You've got to be kidding

I hope the rest of your green cities aren't as full of hot air as Sydney.  The skies ain't blue in Sydney any more and the rail system is on its last legs.  Green Square is green only in name and is just a property development.  And our national environment minister's plan to phase out electric light bulbs was made with an eye to an election this year,  sounds implausible  given the 'plan' to phase out disposable plastic bags in supermarkets has been going on for about ten years, is left up to industry, and has achieved little.  It also pales into insignificance from an Environment Minister who steadfastly refuses to sign the Kyoto Treaty.

Carbon Footprint

Does anybody have a list of the  cities' carbon footprints of their average resident? It seems to me that that is the only objective way to truly measure how "Green" a city is.
I heard somewhere that Manhattan NY residents have a carbon footprint  1/3 the average American!  
They can easily walk or ride mass transit to work or the store so 80% dont even own a car. They live in big buildings that share walls saving in heating and cooling loads.
"NO IMPACT" man also lives there. He lives with a zero carbon footprint! Only in Manhattan.

green cities

I have an article that is called "NYC is the greenest city in America" by David Owen. I also believe that he is probably right.

Good cities are the sustainable way to live on this planet. No matter how many gizmos we are packing into our suburban homes, we will never even make them acceptable in terms of being a sustainable solution.

A while ago, an architect in Colorado loosely associated with the Rocky Mountain Institute published a study that compared the carbon footprint of a very unaware city dweller in Philadelphia (he would leave the windows open rather than turn the heat off, etc...) living in an average row house in that city, with a green conscious person living in some tricked out earth ship off the grid in -- let's say -- New Mexico.

The person in Philly won without trying.

We cannot become a sustainable country as long as we insist on our suburban settlement patterns which generate sprawl.

Remember, suburbs were invented to discourage workers from organizing into unions, by feeding the selfish instincts inside of them. "As long as a man can walk around his house, he won't become a communist".

This fear is the underlying fear that drives people against their own interest, and makes us all still accept unsustainable practices.

Funny, huh - fear of communism, still the same old boogie man, now prevents us from effectively combating climate change.

Gerhard

Congrats Reykjavik

Sounds like they're doing some great stuff, but I'd take Reykjavik and Iceland more seriously as a "green" location if the country stopped commercial whaling.

Vancouver BC

My vote goes to Van BC for being the most pro-active to reduce their carbon footprint. I was there a couple weeks ago because I had heard so much about it. We here in Portland have gotten most of our ideas from Vancouver long ago but they have been more successful. To list some:

#1. Most important, they have made it illegal to build on their surrounding farmland since about 1970 so they have stopped sprawl!

#2This has made it necessary to grow more upward and increase density. They invented the "skinny towers" that pack their downtown and many other places, which dont block all the sun.
Not only has it helped stop sprawl but it has made their downtown remarkably VIBRANT! Robson, Davies, Granville and Denman streets are packed with pedestrians all day and  night long even during weekdays.
 Storees dont close until 11 pm or so!

#3  No freeways go through Vancouver! Freeways just encourage people to live further out in the burbs which is what has ruined American cities. After 6 pm American  downtowns (except Manhattan) become ghost towns.

#4 They built a great light rail mass transit called "SkyTrain" which is now being greatly expanded before the 2010 Olympics. It will be a subway under their downtown. Each Skytrain station is surrounded by half a dozen or more skinny tower apts and condos.

One criticism though is that their downtown is very congested with cars as well. SOmetimes the cars block pedestrians crossings at red lights. I think the Skytrain extension will help alot but I think they need to think about a downtown street car system like Portland is doing now   and possibly more bicycling lanes and streets.  

Here's a great article comparing Portland, Vancouver and Seattle.

"Who is the Smart Growth Leader?"
Hint: it’s not Portland
By Clark Williams-Derry
Great Lakes Bulletin News Service    

Vancouver has achieved remarkable success in directing growth to people-friendly, land-saving neighborhoods. Excellent planning helped. So did the resolve to put far-sighted Smart Growth principles into effect.

Portland, Oregon is a success story among mid-sized American cities.  Its downtown grew more vibrant over the last two decades, attracting new residents and businesses at a time when many other cities were drying up. At the same time, its pioneering growth boundary — in place since the mid-1970s — limited sprawl while protecting farmland and open space..............

http://mlui.org/growthmanagement/fullarticle.asp?fileid=1 ...


Rejkjavik

echoing the comment above about Vancouver not being green because it relies on hydropower: in reference to Rejkjavik, see this article and other about the Karahnjukur Dam http://www.icelandreview.com/icelandreview/daily_life/?ca ....  Hydropower may not emit greenhouse gases, but it forever destroys natural places nonetheless.

NYC says oh please.

You fools.
I signed up for Gristmill just to say - I am through with this blog. You've got it all wrong.

The greenest cities in the world are in those with the least per-capita carbon emissions. Period. None of them are in the United States...Think Mexico. Rio. Places where the poverty is so grinding people can't afford low-density housing and cars.

If we limit the discussion to American cities (ridiculous, but useful for discussion purposes)..let me just break it down for you, like I do for the sustainably-uninitiated I work with every day. The biggest threat to our environment, by far, is the emission of greenhouse gases.  Buildings and cars are by far the most intense consumers of energy and emitters of greenhouse gases. Therefore, the most important factors in evaluating the "greenness" of a community are housing density and proximity to commercial centers via public transportation. By increasing building mass, you save energy. By increasing building mass and density, you share energy needed to heat and cool with your neighbor , and save building materials. By taking public transportation every day, you slash your carbon footprint a hundredfold.

In which city, in the United States, are you most likely to go your entire life without driving a car? Live in an energy-efficient apartment? Walk everywhere? Have HALF the carbon footprint of the average American? ...Guys?

New York City is not a small, wealthy provincial city, such as San Francisco (#8), where people can afford to consume slightly more intelligently (though doing more harm than good with the biodiesel...it could probably be argued that the higher the income, the higher the carbon footprint, given higher rates of consumption and - most likely - jet fuel consumption). New York City is a city that is probably going to hit 11 million in the next ten years, a metropolitan region with millions and millions more. It is by far the country's largest regional economy. And already has, per capita, HALF the carbon footprint of the rest of the country. We win. Hands down.

Maybe we're judging this pageant on ambition alone.....did you completely miss out on what Bloomberg's PlaNYC, announced earlier this year, lays out? It targets, among other goals, a 30% reduction in carbon emissions. Given New Yorkers already have, I repeat, on average, HALF the carbon footprint of everyone else in the USA (especially in #15...Austin, Texas - what are you smoking?), if this happens it will absolutely transform the way energy is generated and consumed on the Eastern Seaboard.

Speaking of - there's not a single city west of the Mississippi on your list. Grist is based in Seattle - a runner-up. Is this just a coastal diss? A beauty contest? NYC has more parkland than any other city in the country - over 20% of the total land area!. PlaNYC aims to create even more! One million additional trees will be planted here by 2030. ONE MILLION TREES.

What does it take to give you all a clue? You can build the greenest frigging office building in the world, and enact all the quasi-suburban "smart growth" initiatives you want, but if even just 1 out of 5 people still drives a car, you're spewing greenhouse gases at a rate that dwarfs the amount saved.

If your standards of sustainable judgement are so devolved, quite frankly, NYC can afford to ignore them. We have our own plan. And well over TEN YEARS worth of conscious greening:
http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/downloads/pdf/report_i ...
http://www.nyc.gov/html/ddc/html/ddcgreen/

Please take a look. Look at it now, rather than ten years from now. Apologies for my tone, but I am working hard everyday to help transform the Western-style model of consumption that is destroying our planet, and it is precisely this kind of idiot thinking from within the ranks of the well-intentioned that makes my job so difficult. Let me make it easy for you, guys - just do two things, for us New Yorkers - stop driving everywhere and stop building new low-density commercial and residential.

Thank you.

PS - Sydney? Are you kidding? Largest per-capita emitter of carbon ... oh forget it


NYC says oh please - errata

Meant to say, there's not a single city EAST of the Mississippi on your list. Everything else is 100% right.

Green Cities

Consider adding Denver Colorado to your list of green cities.  the GreenPrint Denver program outlines an ambitious plan to make Denver the greenest city in the U.S.  This is in step with Govenor Ritter's plan to make Colorado the greenest state.

15 Greenest Cities

this looks like the winners of the 15 best PR agents... but it still shows effort and a changing focus. Thanks

NYC? Get a grip.

All those New Yorkers screeching about how green New York is because of it's density, transit, carbon footprint per person, etc. need to calm down and take a deep breath.  In the midst of this refreshing breath, ask yourself, seriously: how/why is a city like New York even possible?

The answer, of course: the financial, consumer and service economies; "clean" economies of capital that depend heavily on the productions of dirty industry now scattered around the world.  These now more remote dirty economies sustain the false "clean economy" of New York.  Stop beating your chest about being the Green Kings of America, just because you evaluation of "sustainability" extends no further than the city limits.  The smokestacks of worldwide resource exploitation that makes the financial, consumer and service economies of New York possible, and makes New York's "sustainability" credentials so impressive, means that only by the most one-dimensional consideration is New York a "Green" city.

It's like setting the rest of the world on fire and, just because your city isn't presently burning, pronouncing your superiority; even when you're the place people still go when they're looking for a light.  Just because the timber and soot is no longer in the streets of Manhattan, doesn't mean the city is clean.

"The problem with you, son, is that all your brains are in your head." --Bill Shankly

daiquiri and ifranz both wrong.

Daiquiri you are right about NY's low carbon footprint but that is mostly MANHATTAN-ITES. NYC has a LOT of auto dependent suburbia too outside Manhattan. What are they doing for that?  You obviously didnt read my post about Van BC which has outlawed more sprawl!!NOW THAT IS THE GREENEST IDEA EVER! I wish GRIST would get with it about land-use planning and sustainability. Efficient refrigerators are nice but that is no comparison to where to put 7 billion people in a sustainable way. Unbelievable sprawl is the reason the US causes 1/4 of the worlds greenhouse gases.

Please re read my post about Van BC above. what they are doing in Van BC which is easily the greenest city on the continent now with their vigorous Smart Growth anti-sprawl efforts. .

 I franz, we are talking about the most sustainable way to build a modern city. MANHATTAN  has by and large already achieved that. High density ,verticality and mass transit options are the answer. It is capitalism you are complaining about.
That is a different topic altogether. Go to Van BC and see how a modern city should be built. It is the sprawled out cities like Detroit that are  what the US has to go to war for oil. If evrybody lived like a Manhattanite we would use 1/4 the resources we do now! They dont even buy cars there! And Manhattanites are the richest county residents on average in the US!  

The grip -

I never said the near 19 million people living in the NYC metro area are superior. Except that.. we are, insofar as our per capita municipal carbon footprints go.

Regarding the carbon footprint of the economic foundations of the city, NYC's biggest industry is publishing. The publishing industry relies on intellectual capital, ie brain power, which, I believe, is zero carbon.

Jobs in the financial sector - ie those that one could say are directly benefiting from globalism and economic exploitation - total less than 800,000 (including domestic financial services). Compare this with the 3.5 mil working in education, and government.

JFranz, are you trying to propose there is a fundamentally "green" economy?

Honey, all money's funny. Once it changes hands, there's no such thing as a clean dollar bill.

daiquiri

What is NYC doing about its sprawl? I would bet nothing. That means 17 million NYers are living unsustainably in the burbs. Only Manhattan has the low carbon footprint and thats only 2 million  of NYs 19 million. So until they try to reign in the sprawl they aint doing much to curb their carbon footprint.  Maybe they need a Metro government like Portland has. Its a government that oversees all of Portlans burbs as one city unit.

NYC and sprawl..

ErikB, you are right! Sprawl sux and right on Vancouver! It is a good model for new modern urban development.

W/r/to NYC, "sprawl" in the traditional sense is not possible because of existing de facto growth boundaries. NYC - and I mean all 5 boroughs: Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, Bronx, and Staten Island - has both natural growth boundaries, as in the Hudson river, East river, and the bay - as well as the already-built-up urban pressure of Nassau County/Long Island. It is impossible to "sprawl" in the traditional sense, since there is no surrounding virgin land to annex. NYC's problem right now is providing for new population growth within an already extremely dense urban fabric.

Also, I would argue that those of us in the outer boroughs have carbon footprints that are comparable to Manhattan's, and waaay below the American norm, since most of us take the train..

The NYC metro area does not have a metro government, but we do have metropolitan transit authority..not just the subway, and the buses (the entire fleet uses CNG and hybrid-electric) but the Long Island Railroad and Metro-North (serving upstate NY). NYC is also served by New Jersey Transit and the Port Authority of NY and NJ..and countless other public transportation agencies. I don't know what the total ridership is but I'm sure it is staggering, when you consider it in terms of the equivalent # of cars.

ANYway. So the left coast haters hated us off the list. We luv y'all anyway. We would kindly appreciate it though if you would reconsider the terms of this discourse, and shift your energies from debating the right kind of crap to buy (dont buy any of it!) to helping public transportation achieve the level of national prioritization (read: appropriations) it deserves. Furthermore, you really should give us our propers for over a hundred years of right-thinking in that department. Think about it. The subway is one of the most resiliently democratic institutions this country has..  
respect.

PEace out.

daiquiri

Maybe NYC is ghard to fit in the GREN list because it is a MEGALOPOLIS and maybe should be considered as a whole. Afterall, lots of Manhattan workers drive from Jersey and Connecticut which are actaully part of NYC.

Chicago is not deserving

I can't understand how Chicago made the list of "green cities." This city doesn't provide basic recycling services to its residents living in single-family dwellings.  It makes people mix their recyclables with garbage, which is then sorted at huge waste processing centers.  The recycling rate is less than 10 percent.  Chicago officials are just now getting around to piloting the seperate collection of recyclables in two wards. I wish the researchers had done their homework.    

A Bad Day

Sorry about the rant re: NYC yesterday.  I was having a bad day and, for whatever reason, felt the need to vent.  I'll plant a tree to compensate for my emission.

Anyway, the point is/was that the ecological impacts of NYC extend far, far beyond it's municipal borders.  And moreover, this extended ecological impact is larger for NYC than for almost any other city in the world.  Yes, for the most part, it's a generic critique of global capitalism, and not specific to NYC.  However, NYC remains the epicenter of that destructive system, and it's green cred is questionable in that context.

Oh, and others have already commented on limiting definitions of NYC to municipal boundaries.  Sprawl in the Greater New York Metro Area isn't slowing down, and New York can't wall off it's ecological identity from the surrounding communities which sustain the city.

"The problem with you, son, is that all your brains are in your head." --Bill Shankly

Bloomberg

Ifranz, while NYC cant control what goes on in the rest of the NY megalopolis, NY is setting a good example at reast. Manhattan has the highest density of residents in the US while it maintains its dynamic vibrancy. Tourism is through the roof. Bloomberg is trying to get a toll to drive into Manhattan.
 Meanwhile look at Detroit or Houston which have had low density auto dependent sprawl as their strategies for growth. They are both rated as some of the worst places to live in the US.

There is a massive conspiracy with an auto dependent agenda here in the US with Big Oil at the head of the snake. They hate anything to do with Smart Growth or mass transit. They want more sprawl , more roads, more cars and SUVs. NYC is one of the few places in the US standing up to this Big Oil monster. Like I said , only 20% of the Manhattanites own cars which has Big Oil worried. Big Oil and Detroit are the twin headed monsters of the US auto dependent oil hungry globalism machine. SO you should focus your hatred and energy in the fight against them. They are the reason we are in the mideast. They are the reason for terrorism.

Chicago knot

Il Enviro,

The failed Blue Bag recyling program was created by Henry Henderson, Daley's first Director of the Environment.  Now Henry Henderson is on the board of the Illinois Environmental Council representing NRDC.  He'd of given the researchers a nudge to call Daley's Chicago green.

In July, Wal-Mart gave Daley the 2007 Mayors' Climate Protection Award.  
http://blogs.chicagoreader.com/politics/2007/07/11/if-you ...
That may have given the researchers additional reason to call Daley's Chicago green.

This Summer, the Illinois Sierra Club is showing off the "Cool Globes" on the Chicago's Lakefront
http://illinois.sierraclub.org/
- btw, there's a few of them Globes sponsored by BP- that may have given the researchers reason to call Daley's Chicago green.

The Shiny Bean in the picture (part of the 3x over budget $1B "Millennium Park"), that is pretty and may have given the researchers reason to call Daley's Chicago green.  

Daley's current project to invest on a Southside park a $1B temporary stadium for his 2016 Olympic bid for Chicago, may have given the researchers reson to call Daley's Chicago green.

The $1B's Daley has earmarked to expand O'Hare and increase global dimming from Chicago may have given the researchers reason to call Daley's Chicago green.

The new mercury controls on the two Chicago coal-fired power plants may have given the researchers reason to call Daley's Chicago green, afterall, the Fisk plant on Cermak has been operating at its site for over 100 years without mercury controls.

That might be more of the homework for the researchers, to help you understand their results, if that helps.


Chicago! Are you kidding?

I have lived in two cities on the list (Chicago and Portland) and visited many of the others.  I agree with earlier comments that Chicago absolutely does not deserve to be any where near a list of greenest cities.

You need to learn more about Iceland

Sorry guys, but you need to learn more about Iceland. Reykjavík doesn't belong at number one. It has become an American-style city of three-car households and megamalls. The public transport system is dysfunctional and scandal ridden. Little has been done to facilitate bike riding. Recycling in Iceland is in its infancy. A recent newspaper story showed that a lot of Icelanders don't believe recyclables are actually recycled, and most people just throw all their trash into bins destined for landfills. Icelanders, who were dirt poor for decades, are more into conspicuous consumption than small-footprint lifestyles. Reykjavík has serious particulate pollution and smog during the winter due to overuse of studded tires. The rotten-egg smell of hydrogen sulfide (though not at dangerous levels) is even more noticeable in the air now that the geothermal power plant on Hellisheiði is online. As for the three hydrogen buses, it is part of a European Union funded project that ten cities worldwide are taking part in, not an Icelandic originated project. Then there are the problems that have more to do with Iceland than Reykjavík (land erosion due to overgrazing, unnecessary whaling, aluminum processing, and the dams that provide the power for it). You've been bamboozled by tourist brochures, I think. The only reasons why Iceland still has a pretty clean environment have nothing to do with Icelandic society -- low population, hot water in the ground, and clean winds from Greenland and northern Canada.  Icelandic society has done almost all it can to mess up its environment!

Portland, its police, and bikes

Portland is every bit as great a bicycle city as it's reputed to be. However, it should be noted that, with increased bike traffic on Portland streets, police enforcement targeting bikers has also increased. Many feel the enforcement has increased to a disproportionate degree, and that the enforcement often has a harassing tone to it.

For instance, police frequently set up stings at stop signs on popular bike routes (i.e., on Portland's wonderful "bike boulevards": side streets which are designed to discourage car traffic while encouraging bikes, and which are often packed with bicyclists during rush hour), and give out tickets of over $200 to bikers who don't come to a foot-down complete stop. This even when the bikers are making right turns at the stops, and even when the bikers slow enough to make sure the way is clear. Essentially using a technicality to extract $242 a pop from safety-minded, conscientious members of the community that the city uses to tout its eco-friendliness.

It's a good lesson for residents of other cities who want their communities to become more bike-friendly: even as bicycles relieve traffic congestion, make people healthy, and prevent pollution, they're viewed by many as encroaching on what is traditionally considered the car's territory. Police, especially those that chase down bikes from behind the wheel, or on motorcycles, can be the least welcoming to bicyclists, and the most fiercely protective of car territory.

Reykjavik does not belong with the 15 Green Cities

I am an Icelander who has lived in Reykjavik most of my life. I can only agree to the author of "You need to learn more about Iceland". However, he forgets one thing! There is an airport at the centre of the city! There is incredible noise pollution in the Reykjavik area because of this airport. There are large passenger airplanes, small passenger airplanes, private jets, helicopters and all kinds of noisy small airplanes which constantly pest the environment.
  This airport and its operations are protected by politicians in all the political parties. Lax rules and regulations concerning this airport's operations is something that we who live in the Reykjavik area have to accept. Even if these rules and regulations are lax, they are not followed and there is nobody who tries to enforce them. Small airplanes are without exhaust systems; they fly lower than is allowed and they do not follow the routes they are expected to follow. Some of them are literally illegal, but there are not many who care so they get away with it. Complaints from the general public go into the garbage bin immediately.
  If you want to enjoy bird singing and tranquillity in Reykjavik's parks on a nice summer day, forget it. You will only hear noisy airplanes of all sizes and some of the smaller ones are without exhaust systems. You want to watch Tv? Fine, but close the windows. You want to have a chat with somebody? Fine, but go inside and close the door. Not even in the night you can be sure of peace from noisy airplanes. Noise pollution is pollution, and a bad and disturbing one. That Reykjavik is on the list of the 15 Green Cities is a big joke and a big mistake.

About Barcelona

The classification mentions that the city of Barcelona has an urban regeneration plan dealing with "poverty reduction and investment in neglected areas, demonstrating a holistic view of sustainability". I would like to point out a critical vision of this urban policy. Local Catalan architects of the NGO "Architects without borders" ("arquitectos sin fronteras", working in Spain and abroad) state that the city projects are too much focused on tourism and trade with a tiny interest for citizens along with the loose of the city's nature (historical heritage destruction...). They try to create alternative projects on these issues and to bring an alternative vision they also act with inhabitants against the transfer, after expropriation of their inner city dwelling, of the inhabitants and their relocation in places which do not fit with a sustainable city vision (outskirts of the city for instance)...
If you read Spanish go on their website to know more about an alternative vision of Barcelona's urban, social and environmental issues: http://www.asfes.org/campanyes-asf/Postals/Galeria.htm

"brown" cities

My town and area are not green at all! They are "brown" if I can use this coulor, because of the pig´s manure that is put on all over the fields and has polluted all the natural springs and rivers with high levels of Nitrates. So everyone has to use treated water and buy bottled water if you don´t like the taste of tap water, wich most citizens don´t like.
The towns do recycle most rubish and food waste is turned into fertilizer, but this is just a small fracture of good things.
My big family and I are nearly all vegetarian, and we are oposed in the industrial farming wich is killing our enviroment, I don´t understand how polititians don´t see the disaster aproching.
Adam from Manlleu, catalunya, near andorra (Iberian peninsula).
www.peta.org (visit this US web page)

Methodology?

I guess I don't understand lists like this that have no methodology behind them. They tend to polarize dramatically (exhibit A: all the polarized comments) and get nothing done but create a squabble. Forbes does this every month with some new factor and it pretty much comes out feeling the same as what Grist has done here.

What would be helpful is to target goal areas (carbon footprint, sprawl factor, metro area footprint, urban agriculture, greenspace and transportation data) and look at the world's leader in each. Then places can have some serious pride about accomplishments.

My personaL biggest issue on this list was with London. They haven't even completed the policies for which they are being given credit. NYC mayor did exactly the same thing and didn't make the list. Paris just started bike sharing, has a great transit system and is overflowing with park space. Why not them?

Green Cities: SustainLane US City Ranking

Ever check out sustainLane's US City Ranking?:
http://www.sustainlane.com/us-city-rankings/

It has a published methodology
http://www.sustainlane.com/us-city-rankings/methodology.j ...

and is based on 2,000 data and info points of largest 50 US cities, including public transportation ridership rates (Hello, "Green City" Austin: 2 percent?!!), walk or bike to work.

It's also in book form "How Green is Your City?" www.howgreenisyourcity.com


Amsterdam?

I'm not sure if they deserve to be on the list, especially with all the pollution in the city (the river is revolting), but you have to admit, Amsterdam does deserve credit for the massive amount of bicycles being used. Besides, cycling is seen as a symbol of Amsterdam, along with some other not so pleasant symbols. Being from Long Island, NY, it truly is surprising to see a parking garage filled to the brink with bicycles, not cars. Cycling paths are everywhere, and there are even vending machines that allow people to rent bikes. This is a system that everyone should learn from (possibly with the exception of Copenhagen, which has already been enlightened according to this list, but I personally have not been there yet). Unfortunately, bikes are often stolen, and in other areas, Amsterdam doesn't have the best rep (though this is an environmental site, so there's no need to discuss that).

Reuse Me: The R3ice Plan (http://reuseme.co.nr)
Ranking?

I can only agree with zingbot, that there is a huge lack of good methodology for this article. All initiatives presented in the article are of course promising but to rank the cities according their visions and plans are just stupid and spreads false conclusions. I have already read a couple of articles from different countries where Reykjavik is announced as the greenest city in the world based on the list presented here which is a totally ridiculous statement.

I live in Reykjavik and work as an environmental consultant since half a year ago and I can only agree to what have been said in earlier comments about Reykjavik . I can also add that waste water treatment is almost non-existing with only mechanical cleaning and then 300 meter long pipes straight out in the ocean. The environmental regulations here are just a joke compared to most other countries and even if there are some intentions from different actors in the city, Reykjavik is neither a green city today nor will it become one in a foreseeable future.

Interesting list

I lived in Thailand for 4 years, traveled to Portland numerous times and now live in Chicago.  I would have to say that I laugh at the idea of Bangkok being in any way similar to the other two.  Imagine a bag of marbles dumped onto the floor.  I am talking about hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of marbles and that is what it is like with cars and motorbikes in Bangkok.

Greenest smog & asphalt in the world

As a citizen of Reykjavík, I registered especially to comment on this joke of a ranking. Whichever teenage blog-reading girl compiled this list, obviously has very little clue on what makes the city green, sustainable or whatever way you call it, neither she's got any idea about Iceland's environmental stance. If there is any, except the blurb Board of Tourism is happy to feed to ignorant tourists.

The ranking's #1, Reykjavík, features like 5 parks with trees in total. And that's it for the green spaces, unless you count grass medians between roads or mossy lava desert covering huge spaces that separate districts of the city spread in a car-dependant sprawl that makes 60's LA look like smart planning. Ppl drive to take a stroll, to walk the dog, hell they even drive to get drunk downtown. The mentioned hydrogen buses fleet, the whole THREE of them, is not supported anymore and is and has been cruising the streets empty because the citizens prefer to clog the roads in their oversized, gas-guzzling american pickups and SUVs. Concerning the land usage, basically everything that isn't a road, is a parking lot. There is no rail transport at all ("not needed yet", according to government, reminds of 60's America again) and the buses are expensive (single fare equals 2.5L of gasoline), unreliable, and generally useless given their weird routes and low frequency (i.e. travel to IKEA from my house takes 10mins on a car, and 64mins on 2 buses with lovely 24mins waiting for transfer in the middle of the desert). The clean Icelandic air that Icelanders love to boast about, is something you get to breathe maybe at early Sunday morning, other times it being turned to stinky smog to the point that during low-wind periods like last spring, children and ppl with respiratory problems are advised to stay home. Wherever you go, you see parked cars idling, because their owners don't bother stopping the engines when they go shopping or wait for someone, and during my work as machine operator I´ve became used to sight of 45-ton excavators burning 50L of diesel an hour, running during the whole shift, regardless the operator was working another machine, sleeping, having one of 30min coffee breaks or a lunch.

Recycling barely exists here, and if it wasn't for cans/PET bottles you get paid for, it would remain just one of these things Icelanders, having little else to try, would be "different" at. Not only ppl don't recycle, they don't even reuse, let alone think of reducing. It is common to just throw away perfectly working bikes, TVs or furniture when one decides to buy some new model. Electrical energy for homes comes from green sources, yeah (mostly because Iceland hasn't got any fossil fuels of its own), but its usage per capita is highest in Europe, and its industrial utilization usually means third world type uses like aluminium smelters not only having a huge carbon footprint but also getting the power from hydroelectric not geothermal plants, construction of which brings major damage to the real Icelandic wildlife outside of the overconsuming, careless, diesel-breathing, car-inhabited capitol..

Btw. the liquid waste goes to the Ocean not- or almost bot treated at all! Talking of experience, I've been building the sewers in Mosfallsbær for several months until it turned out there is no treatment plant they'd lead to, just the shore! Beat this, environmental experts!

Oh and I guess I didn't mention the Greater Reykjavík population of ca. 180,000 drives 140,000 cars? And no, not Priuses, more like Fords, Dodges, Chevrolets or 70+cm-diameter wheeled Arctic Toyotas that sound like dozers and exhaust black smoke.

But now thanks to your #1 place, widely covered in local newspapers, the Reykjavík dwellers can now sleep assured they are actually green capitol of the world, and care even less..

London

I guess London's controversial congestion charge has helped improve it's green credentials.

There are also big plans to reduce carbon emmissions and make London more sustainable.

London with it's 1700 Parks and Open Spaces, is quite a green city.

I was surprised New York, London's sister city wasn't on the list, NY as one of the lowest carbon footprints of any big major city.

Paris, London's other sister city, is also a verey green city.

However I feel London deserves it's place for being bold and introducing new legislation, congestion charges, sustainable development plans and a future long term green environmental plan to
secure a year in year out reduction in carbon emmissions.

Kent, WA, USA

I would submit Kent, WA as a green city.

I can still visit farmers markets within the city.

We are working on bicycle routes.

Most of all it's a unique blend of sprawl and farmland and urban clusters like downtown.

You can still find real food here in the markets.

You can see and taste the food of ethnic groups from India, Southern Black, Thai, Ukrainian, and many more.

Kent is place where we can take parts of the old agrarian lifestyle, the new high tech lifestyle, the town and the sprawl and put it all together.

I live in an apartment complex that blends a community center, cars, and inner play areas and picnic areas.

But don't come to Kent...we have enough already...and we are working to make it better.  

Use us as a model!

Laughable

Sorry to be blunt, but this list is laughable. I recommend proper research and a healthy dose of professional journalism in the future, in order avoid looking like amateurs and wikimorons.

I have so many comments about wrong stats and misinformation on the list that I don't even know where to start.

Portland

Living in Portland, I would agree that it deserves to be on the list! I think we do a fair job of trying to be green.

PDXistence- I wonder if the police action has more to do with so many accidents involving bicycles than with taking money from their riders? I do agree, though, that if that is the case, they need to go after the drivers of cars much more aggressively than the bikers.

Brenna

Tokyo

If having good public transportations makes a city green, then Tokyo definitely is one of them. It had to have a good mass transpotation system due to its limitation of land. Because of the limited land, not many people in Tokyo can even own cars.

Other reasons why Tokyo could be one of the greenest cities:
-They use their own grocery bags(called eco-bags)
-They completely separate their garbages into burnable, unburnable, plastics(recycles), paper,etc
-Most newly built houses are energy efficient
-Hybrid cars sell the most
-Use of solar energy for electricity is popular
-Beef consumption is not too high
-Most of them have two or less kids
-They don't use too much disposable products such as plastic plates, paper towels, etc


KaoriN

Bangkok????

Puh-leez! Did anyone who helped create this list actually travel to any of these cities? If they would have, they would have known that there's no way - not a chance, zero, zip, nada - that Bangkok should be considered green. They may be trying to improve things, and they deserve major credit for that. But right now it has massive air and water pollution and completely unsustainable sprawl. They have light years to go before anyone should think of them as green.

NYC Is Not Green

Gosh New Yorkers are obnoxious and arrogant.  Sorry, living in San Francisco and traveling to NYC, I can tell you NYC is not green.  Sure it has great mass transit, I give them that but it still has crazy sprawl.  It may be dense sprawl, but sprawl nonetheless.  It is way too overpopulated and lacks nature nearby - sorry, Central Park is not nature.  It doesn't have the green space that San Francisco or Portland has because it is overgrown and no steps were taken to protect greenspace.  

"in 2003 38% of all transit ridership in the U.S. occurred in the NYC area, 7% in Chicago, and 5% in SF";  Well, considering that NYC is 8+ times the size of SF, then that means SF has an almost equal ridership, and unlike NYC, people can actually ride their bikes on the streets, which is even more green than subways and buses.  

Sorry, no major city in the East Coast deserve to be on this list.  San Francisco,  Vancouver, and Portland truly deserve to be.  NYC is way behind on recycling and protecting the balance of urban and nature.  This is something that New Yorkers just do not understand.  They live in a rat race in a concrete jungle.  Sorry, but just having subways is not enough.  

Congratulations San Francisco, Vancouver and Portland!  And, to the disgruntled New Yorkers,  "Fugghetaboutit!"

Vancouver

Someone forgot to tell the sprawl east and south of vancouver that it is not allowed to be there.

How about cities in New Zealand?

I'm just wondering why New Zealandic cities didn't make it. I'm pretty sure Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch are green cities too.. :)

http://vjczar.blogspot.com/
Windustrious Cleveland

Cleveland can become one of the planet's leading cities, when it comes to the production of renewable energy:  Here in Northeast Ohio, we have the opportunity to build the world's first freshwater wind farm, a few miles offshore on Lake Erie.  Please note the dynamic, and growing, list of Champions for this proposal on the web site: http://windustrious.org .  If you'd like to join the call, from wherever you are in the world, please email me, with a supporting comment, and some form of identification, (and a photo if you like), and I'll add you to the list.
<sarah@windustrious.org>

Sarah Taylor
Win $100 -- Publish your Green Urban Life!

    * Live in a major US city?
    * Into sustainability?
    * Always on the lookout for green trends?

Help us shine some light into your corner of the map. Send us your perspectives (humorous, tragic, ironic) on living green in your gray city.

    * Is it easy to use your city without a car?
    * What energy sources would suit your city best?
    * How would you reform the city's spaces, if you were queen/king?

The more specific you are, the more your city's flavor will emerge. Geek out or wax poetic. Dig deep for your inner-urbanist.

http://www.sustainlane.com/us-city-ranking/green-urban-li ...

Some ideas:

    * Tell us the story about the commuter rail that doesn't exist (voted down yet again). Would it run near your neighborhood, if it did?
    * Tell us about the successes. Does the city leadership have the right idea? Are there projects run by nonprofit organizations or businesses worth mentioning?

Formal contest ends September 12th, but we'll take submissions after that as well.

Cheers!

http://www.sustainlane.com/us-city-ranking/green-urban-li ...

Chicago ain't bad

It may not be one of the greenest cities in the opinion of some of the posters here but you do not need to own a car if you live in the city or many of the inner suburbs. Mass transit has always been around, it is not a new thing, and it must cut down on the number of car trips compared to the sprawl cities in the sunbelt. Also Chicago has many forest preserves right in the city as well as in the suburbs that cover thousands of acres.

Portland? You've got to be kidding

Any list of green cities that includes Portland was clearly based on P.R. Portland has a small group of people on the southeast side who use bikes part of the year and that is it. Its residents are electrical energy pigs (at least compared to residents of CA)and it is the second most hostile place in the west to cycle. I have spent many a week in Portland and, outside of the SE corner, have seen only orthodox Jews on Sabbath get around by any means other than fossil-fool powered wheelchairs. The Willamette River is a toxic Superfund site with no hope of cleanup. The open space is confined to the fringes where it is mostly experienced by people who drive to it. In the Summer, the air tastes of CARcinogens and in the Winter it is full of soot. There is as yet no reliable intercity public transit to serve the region outside of the core; in fact, the Amtrak service has been reduced this decade.

Portland green? No, just a slightly lighter shade of brown than some other cities with an unjustified sense of accomplishment.

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Username: Password:

Forgot your password? Enter your username and click:

The comments of Grist users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?


Also in Grist

The Week's Most Popular