PDS APES 5th Period 2009-10

Okay so after looking over the study guide, I’m a little confused on urban sprawl.  It seems like an easy concept though, so I’m not sure if just over complicating it.  Does it refer to cities becoming urbanized like New York when they’re growing taller instead of flatter?  Is it like a suburb?  Also, why does it decrease energy  efficiency?  To me, it seems it would help increase it because new technology and machinery can be introduced.

Also, how much about the tax incentives and subsidies do we have to know?  Just be familiar with it or know details?

On the last page or so of the chapter there is a yellow box which includes ways to promote smart growth.  Under the heading of ‘Taxes’ the book explains to “tax land, not buildings” and “tax land on value of actual use (such as forest and agriculture) instead of on highest value as developed land.” I don’t understand how taxing land, not buildings would limit sprawl. Is it that land owners are more likely to maximize the land’s potential when it’s more expensive pay taxes on land, not buildings?  If so, why? As for the second question, does it mean that a plot of land with the potential to support agriculture/forests, but is instead developed, should be taxed more than developed land that’s unsuitable to agriculture/forests? Thanks.

I am a little bit confused on how the AGR is decreasing, when it seems that more countries are in stage 2 than stage 3 or 4. This could be wrong, but it seems that way to me.  I also have another smaller question. In the book it says that Pakistan is the fifth biggest country by population, but we said it was Brazil in class. Which one is it?

After reading the article on rainwater and its runoff, It made me think about the PH scale project that James and I did. We mentioned that rainwater is more acidic (PH value less than 7) than pure water. I was wondering how acidic this rainwater has really become and what point of acidity is too much for typical plants to endure (PH scale). Also, if the acid in our rainwater is combining with pollutants, at what point should we start treating rainwater (PH value) and do we really have the money and time to focus on that?

This is a blog post I’m making as both a personal study tool and a potentially beneficial class review. Enjoy!

Urbanization is the demographic shift from rural areas to cities and their outlying urban areas. There are five major global trends regarding this phenomenon that you need to know:

1. More people live in urban areas than ever before, and that percentage is rising. From 1850 to 2007, the percent of people living in urban areas skyrocketed from 2% to 50%, and we’re tracking to hit 60% by 2030. Most of this growth is in developing countries’ already stressed cities.
2. The number and sizes of urban areas are mushrooming. Each week, 1 million more people join urban areas’ populations. Between 2006 and 2015–a scant six years away–the number of urban areas with at least 1 million people will jump from 400 to 564.
3. The urban populations of developing countries are rapidly increasing. By 2030, the percent of people living in developing countries’ urban areas will jump to 56% (from 2007′s 43%), and in South America, 80% of the people already live in urban areas.
4. Developed countries’ urban growth is slower than developing countries’ urban growth. Despite this, projections indicate that 84% of developed countries’ populations will live in urban areas by 2030. (compared with 2007′s 75%)
5. Poverty is increasingly urbanized. At least one billion people worldwide live in crowded, unsanitary slums and shantytowns or live in cities’ outskirts. This number may double in 30 years.

A poverty-stricken shantytown in Lima, Peru.

Why is poverty becoming urbanized? Well, that’s inextricably tied to the very reasons why people end up in urban areas in the first place. There are factors that pull (attract) people to urban areas, and there are factors that push (force) people to leave rural areas for urban areas.

• Pull factors: jobs, food, housing, entertainment, freedom from religious, racial, and political conflicts
• Push factors: poverty, lack of land for growing food, declining agricultural jobs, famine, war

As more and more people join urban areas, they have to grow, and in some cases, this growth qualifies for urban sprawl, the growth of low-density developments on the edges of cities and towns. These developments result in loosely connected “hodgepodges” of housing developments, office complexes, and commercial centers. Granted, there are some requisites for urban sprawl to occur: affluence, ample and affordable land, automobiles, cheap gasoline, and poor urban planning. Charlotte seems to be suffering from this sort of spreading-out.

An afternoon view of Los Angeles' urban sprawl.

Because everything in urban sprawl is spread out over large swaths of land, there tend to be many problems associated with urban sprawl. I will break them down by category:

• Land and biodiversity: As urban sprawl “gobbles up the countryside,” as our book puts it, it results in the loss of cropland, the loss of forests and grasslands, the loss of wetlands, and the loss and fragmentation of wildlife habitats.
• Water: With more people comes an increased need for water, and this translates into an increased use of surface water and groundwater. Due to clear-cutting wide swaths of vegetation–and the subsequent loss of root systems–there is increased runoff and flooding. All of those people produce all sorts of pollutants, which lead to increased surface water and groundwater pollution, the most undesirable one being sewage; moreover, the growing numbers of people decrease natural sewage treatment.
• Energy, Air, and Climate: Urban sprawl tends to result in nonexistent or inadequate mass transportation systems, and people are consequently wedded to their automobiles, leading to increased air pollution, increased greenhouse gas emissions, and enhanced global warming. The increased demand for energy skyrockets energy production–leading to the aforementioned effects–and energy waste also rises due to low population density.
• Economy: As people leave the city to the suburbs–the classic urban sprawl scenario–much of the city’s tax base leaves with them, leading to higher taxes, increased unemployment in the central city, and the decline of downtown business districts.

Please keep in mind, however, that urban sprawl is the excessive end of the spectrum of urbanization; as a whole, urbanization much more of a mixed bag, with both pros and cons.

Pros: centers of economic innovation; educational and technological leaders; better access to medical care and family planning; recycling is more economically feasible; helps preserve biodiversity by concentrating people in cities and reducing stresses on wildlife habitats

Cons: unsustainable ecological footprints (urban areas are 2% of land area but consume 75% of its resources); lack of vegetation (shade, oxygen, absorb air pollutants, cooler temps.); huge use of water; produce most pollution (and is concentrated); increased spread of infectious disease, especially if adequate drinking water and sewage systems are not available; “heat island” effect; light pollution

Cities are constantly trying to tackle these problems, and one of the most pressing is the one of transportation and its effects on the city’s well-being. In many ways, city growth somewhat hinges on transportation: in compact cities (build “up”) like Tokyo, people build up and walk, ride bicycles, or use mass transit; in places like the United States, however, the spread-out, built-for-the-car dispersed city (build “out”) is the more prevalent type. There seems to be a pattern with transportation, though; as efficiency increases, the need for scheduling also increases, and this scheduling is something into which people must buy. Bicycles do not necessarily fit this mold–indeed, they may be one of the most efficient means of personal transportation–but their size, small range, and lack of weather protection makes them suited only for some conditions.

There is a way our book mentions, however, in which we can create and maintain sustainable cities: smart growth. Smart growth calls for more environmentally sustainable development by lessening dependence on cars, controlling and directing sprawl, and reducing wasteful resource use. This can be accomplished by limits/regulations, protection, zoning, taxes, planning, tax breaks, and revitalization for new growth.

An ecocity is essentially a more environmentally sustainable city than the one smart growth attempts to address, for it emphasizes these six sustainability goals:

• Build/re-design cities for people, not cars
• Use solar and other locally available renewable energy resources; design buildings to be heated and cooled as much as possible by nature
• Use energy and matter resources efficiently
• Prevent pollution and reduce waste
• Recycle, reuse, and compost at least 60% of all municipal solid waste
• Protect and encourage biodiversity by preserving surrounding land and protecting/restoring natural systems and wetlands

A picture of Curitiba, Brazil, our book's model environmentally sustainable city. Note the greater abundance of trees here than in Los Angeles.

Pictures:

• Lima: http://www.responsibletravel.com/community/images/member/f_51602718_3196.jpg
• LA: http://www.photodiary.org/large/e_1167.jpg
• Curitiba: http://www.freewebs.com/filipebruno/curitiba.jpg

Cities provide many good things (jobs, social services, education, family planning, medical centers, arts programs) but create many problems.  These web sites allow you to explore some major problems associated with cities and to explore some solutions.  Leave a meaningful comment or question about one issue or city.

A. Problems. Visit each web site &  take note of key issues or terms:

Air Pollution in US Cities (take note of Charlotte, NC!)
http://www.citymayors.com/environment/polluted_uscities.html

Urban Heat Islands (explore the links and learn stuff)
http://eetd.lbl.gov/HeatIsland/LEARN/

Urban Stormwater (pavement and parking lots are problems?)
http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/stormwater/

City Landfills (read, scroll down, click next page about 10 times)
http://people.howstuffworks.com/landfill.htm

B. Solutions. Visit each city and study solutions to their problems:

Curitiba’s Urban Experiment (more about Miller’s case study city—make sure you click on SOLUTIONS and take the tour!)
http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/fellows/brazil1203/

EcoCity Clevlend (try links under “Ecological Design”)
http://www.ecocitycleveland.org/

Chattanooga, Tenn. (…from “worst” to “first” in 40 years? How?)
http://www.sprol.com/?p=332#more-332

“Rain Gardens Cut City Pollution” (BBC News)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4654362.stm

*If you have time, here are two of the most, um, “visionary” web site I could find about utopian future cities (really WACKY stuff):

Victory City:  The City of the Future
http://www.victorycities.com/

Waltopia:  The Original Vision for Disney’s Epcot Center
http://www.the-original-epcot.com/

In class we discussed human population growth rates in regards to 3 different equations. Each equation took into account certain aspects of population growth, including constant birth rate (CBR), constant death rate (CDR), annual growth rate (AGR), and doubling time. All three of these equations assist us in predicting future populations of any given area bases on the current year’s population.

1. Rule of 70

It is important to keep in mind that the AGR must be expressed in terms of a percent in order for the equation to work. That being said, do not change the percent to a decimal form, for example 7% to 0.07.

_______________________________________________________

2. Annual Growth Rate

The number you get from the AGR formula will already be in a precent form. Do not try and “change” it into a percent by shifting the decimal places.

______________________________________________________

3. Annual Population Increase/Decrease

The Annual Population Increase/Decrease formula is tricky. There are a lot of places for errors to be made, so it was suggested in class to utilize scientific notation, then change the answer back to standard form. It would still work to do the entire equation in long form, but there are more room for errors.

__________________________________________________

*Note: This is a guest blog by Syd L. in 8th period.

http://www.aag.org/education/center/cgge-aag%20site/population/images/pop_rates.jpg

Today, we learned about Demographic Transition. It is best illustrated by a graph displaying the CDR (Crude Death Rate), CBR (Crude Birth Rate), and Population size. The model that we use has four stages:

1. The first stage is the pre industrial stage–generally tribal nations–and are non-existent these days. In the first stage, the CDR and CBR are approximately equivalent, resulting in a stable population.
2. The second stage consists of coutries that are transitional, that is countries that are becoming industrialized and have achieved the technology to lower death rates. Therefore, for countries in stage two, the CDR sharply declines while the CBR remains almost the same, causing the population to begin an exponential growth. Most developing nations are described as in stage two.
3. Countries in the third stage are industrial and are most of the world’s developed nations. During this stage, the country’s CBR begins to decrease to meet the CDR; however, the two rates are not quite equal, so the population still grows, but at a slower rate.
4. Fourth stage countries consists of a few developed nations and are not very common today. At this point, the CDR and CBR will again be nearly the same, but much lower than they were in stage one. The population stabilizes which gives an “S” shape to the population curve.

But why does this happen?

There are a couple of good reasons why the graph looks the way it does:

• In stage 1, the CDR remains very high because the medication in the country is not very developed, the sanitation is poor, and the food supply is often unstable. All of this leads to an increase in disease and malnutrition, and therefore, death.
• Also in stage 1, the CBR is very high because women cannot ensure that their children will live past their childhood, so they have ‘insurance babies’ to make sure that they have children. And many places in stage 1 may require children as a work force, so more children means that more work can be done. Plus, with a lack of development, the women in stage 1 countries may not have the education on birth control that others do.
• In stage 2, the CDR drops as the country develops and the factors that held the CDR so high–medicine, sanitation, and nutrition– are improved.
• In stage 3, the CBR drops as children begin to cost more to raise; whether it be the cost of food, education, or urban living, raising a child becomes an investment. Also, with children not needed in the work force, more kids does not mean more income for a family. Finally, in many developed countries, the opportunities and education for women increase; women can now hold their own jobs, which restricts the amount of time that they can spend raising children, or they may also learn the advantages to family planning and birth control.
• At last, in stage 4, all of the factors in stages 2 and 3 even each other out to create a stable population.

Where do some countries fall on this graph?

USA? Stage 3

India? Stage 2

China? Stage 3

Japan? Stage 5? As we have learned, the CBR in Japan is far lower than the CDR. Can there be a different stage for situations such as these?

http://mat0515.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/demographic_transition_detailed.jpg

If you enjoyed the TEDTalk by Hans Rosling, I wanted give a chance to learn more about his work.

First, here is today’s video if you want to watch it again:

Second, if any of you are interested in more about the stats in the presentation go to Dr. Rosling’s web site:
http://www.gapminder.org/
Explore the links and the tutorial. You can study these demographic trends for yourself-you can test ideas in the book by building your own graphs (Gapminder World).  Here is one I’ll give out in class:

Click to Enlarge

Maybe you are in a global studies class and need research displayed in a very cool format?

Third, here is another 18-minute TEDTalk Hans Rosling gave in 2007 on myths about poverty:

What do you think of Dr. Rosling’s presentations?

A few weekends ago I was reading the Sunday Times and came across an Op-ed that I thought related to our study of human population dynamics. The subject of the article is naming these past ten years, and one Stanford professor suggested we call it the decade of overshoot. He explains that because in the ’90s we ignored the warning signals of problems to come (terrorism, environment, economy), these problems escalated and surpassed the preexisting institutions’ capability to solve them, thus the past decade has been spent dealing with the consequences of this overshoot.

Anyway, here’s the link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/15/weekinreview/15segal.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&sq=decade%20&st=cse&scp=3