It takes about 10 fossil fuel calories to produce each food calorie in the average American diet. So if your daily food intake is 2,000 calories, then it took about 20,000 calories to grow that food and get it to you. In more familiar units, this means that growing, processing and delivering the food consumed by a family of four each year requires the equivalent of almost 34,000 kilowatt-hours of energy, or more than 930 gallons of gasoline. (For comparison, the average U.S. household annually consumes about 10,800 kilowatt-hours of electricity, or about 1,070 gallons of gasoline.) In other words, we use about as much energy to grow our food as to power our homes or fuel our cars.
There are now good examples of new neighborhoods and development projects that design-in from the beginning, spaces for community gardens and that attempt to satisfy a considerable portion of food needs on-site or nearby. Growing food within cities and urban (and suburban) environments can take any number of forms. Community gardens, urban farms, and edible landscaping are all promising urban options. Prominent and compelling examples of edible urban landscaping have shown that it is possible to trade hardscape environments for fruit trees and edible perennials. In the downtown Vancouver neighborhood of Mole Hill, for instance, a conventional alleyway has been converted to a green and luxurious network of edible plants and raised-bed gardens, in a pedestrianised community space, where the occasional automobile now seems out of place. New urban development can include places (rooftops, sideyards, backyards) where residents can directly grow food. This has been a trend in developed cities, as new urban ecological neighborhoods have included community gardens as a central design element (e.g. Viikki, in Helsinki, South False Creek in Vancouver, Troy Gardens in Madison) but is perhaps most famous in Cuban cities over the past few decades in response to being cut-off from oil imports. Cities need to find creative ways to promote urban farming where it is feasible and not in tension with the need to redevelop for reduced car dependence. This may mean that a city can utilize the many vacant lots for commercial and community farms in areas that have been blighted (e.g. estimated 70,000 vacant lots in Chicago alone). However if these areas are well served with good transit and other infrastructure then such uses should be seen as temporary and indeed can be part of the rehabilitation of an area leading to the redevelopment of eco-villages that are car free and models of solar building as in Vauban. Many cities have embarked on some form of effort to examine community food security and to promote more sustainable local and regional food production. These can be integrated into ecologically sustainable urban and regional rehabilitation projects and can utilize the intensive possibilities of urban spaces such as in urban permaculture. In Madison, Wisconsin, a model urban garden called Troy Gardens has emerged from excess land owned by a state-owned mental hospital. Dubbed the Accidental Eco-village by those involved in its transformation, the land was being sold in 1995 when the community who used it as a garden and park stepped in and formed an association to try and buy the land. Through partnerships with other NGOs and the University of Madison Department of Urban and Regional Planning, the Friends of Troy Gardens was able to create a diversity of uses that enabled the money to be found. Thus on the site now is a mixed income co-housing project involving 30 housing units, a community garden with 320 allotments, an intensive urban farm using traditional Hmong agricultural techniques for a community supported agriculture enterprise, and a prairie restoration scheme which is regenerating local biodiversity. Progress in moving away from fossil fuels will also require serious localizing and local sourcing of building materials and this in turn provides new opportunities to build more photosynthetic-economies. The value of emphasizing the local is many-fold and the essential benefits are usually clear. Dramatic reductions in the energy consumed of these materials is, of course the primary benefit. It is also of course about strengthening local economies and helping them to become more resilient in the face of global economic forces and it is also about re-forming lost connections to place. At the Bed ZED project in London, more than half of the building materials for the project came from within a 35-mile radius, and the wood used in construction, as well as a fuel in the neighborhood’s CHP plant, derives from local council forests. A photosynthetic approach to urban use of fibre will mean an added reduction in fibre miles as well as potential to help re-grow bioregions. What do you think? Leave us a comment. ———- Peter Newman is Professor of Sustainability at Curtin University in Perth, Australia. He is the co-author of Cities as Sustainable Ecosystems, Green Urbanism Down Under, and Resilient Cities: Responding to Peak Oil and Climate Change.Peter Newman is the Professor of Sustainability at Curtin University and Director of CUSP. Newman has served on the Board of Infrastructure Australia and a Lead Author for Transport on the IPCC's 5th Assessment Report.