Really?

Via John, an article on building giant skyscraper farms to feed the world's cities. This is exactly the kind of technology reporting that I can't stand. It's really common in magazines like Discover (which I love.) They uncritically report on cool ideas that range from totally impossible to very unlikely except under extraordinary conditions and claim that they'll... solve global warming!

The building/farm is supposed to do all sorts of fancy things. It'll generate energy through 1) a photo voltaic collector that will presumably turn the electricity into light. This is obviously less efficient than just letting the light hit the plants, and so will presumably not even power one story of this 50 story building. 2) The building will collect wind power, which is pretty sweet, but I can't imagine it will reliably generate power for light for all 50 stories of the building. 3) The non-edible plant waste will be used to generate power. That's awesome, but the energy in the plant waste had to come from light the plants absorbed, so that's only an efficiency improvement, and certainly isn't an energy source. Yet the article suggests that this building is going to produce more energy than it consumes. 4) Everything will be organic. How? Because it said so! 5) Even though all of the unused plant waste is being removed to make fuel, it won't need fertilizers. Why not? Because it said so! Right there in the first page of the article.

There's a lot of cool stuff in there with really interesting implications for urban design, but pardon me if I roll my eyes when I read the article. I'd love to see buildings using solar and wind power, purifying sewage, collecting rain water, and using energy and space efficient design, but I'll believe in the magical energy and water and food producing organic building when I see it in Manhattan.

I'm a Republican

I wasn't old enough to vote against mayor Mike Bloomberg in '00 or '04, but after reading today's Times, I can say that I would happily support him in '08 if he could run again. The guy has always seemed competent, only about an eighth as obnoxious as Giuliani, and generally interested in doing well for the city. My three major complaints have been that he 1) has deeply flawed views on education, 2) wasn't willing to stick his neck out and turn NYC into a truly green city and 3) is a Republican.

Well, I still don't buy into the small school education philosophy, though that's a post for another day. But he has fought as hard as anyone to get the city our fair share of education funds, and for that I applaud him.

Today we learn that he's pushing for a massive environmental/developmental package that could reshape the city. NYC could and should be the most environmentally friendly city on the planet, and a model for living in the post-fossil fuel world. This (especially the congestion pricing!) is a great first step, and it will be illuminating to see who lines up in support. Were I registered to vote in NY, the position of the candidates for mayor and for local office on this issue in would probably determine my vote more than anything else.

On the other hand, he's still a Republican. I feel dirty complimenting him, so I'll have to go shower now.