Last week during the Rose Cafe, Professor Schmidt visited to tell us about is area of study: urban planning. The discussion began with his going into his field a little bit. He told us about why something like urban planning would be significant and how the same large questions persist throughout the study. One of the big themes he tied in the climate change and how civil engineering can help reduce the carbon footprint people leave behind.
Professor Schmidt make the discussion interactive by having each student tell where they are from and what type of area they grew up in, whether rural, urban, or suburban. I found this very interesting because there was a huge amount of people from suburban areas, which I guess could be expected. But I definitely was surprised by how few people were from the inner city. We mainly gauged our areas based on concentration of people, types of buildings, and transportation. We then answered questions about how this affected our childhood growing up in terms of recreation and schooling, especially in suburbia.
The discourse then shifted to how living on Cornell’s campus greatly plays a factor into reducing our own personal carbon footprint. For example, much of our produce is locally sourced. Many of Cornell’s facilities are communal, such as bathrooms, laundry rooms, and relaxing areas. There has been a rise in communal communities around the cunty, and it seems like this would be the way to go if thinking about the Earth.
I really wish we had more time to talk to Professor Schmidt. One thing I would have liked to discuss is how being from low income areas- that are usually urban- affects one’s carbon footprint. As someone who comes from inner Los Angeles, I find that low income people have been ‘green’ because they do not have a choice: many cannot afford to eat meat often, reducing their carbon footprint by a significant amount. They often wash their clothes by hand because laundry is expensive or they do not have their own laundry machines. Electric and water bills are always conservative to save money, and many grow their own food in hopes of saving a dime.
I think they are an untapped guide on how to live greener, but many seem to overlook this because these qualities are seen as markers of being underprivileged. Yes, they sometimes do so out of necessity, but the outcome is the same. They save money while also saving the world, and that is admirable to say the very least.
Your have a very insightful view on the cafe, and it makes me wonder about the American view on climate change. Maybe the reason why Americans are so against climate change is not because the climate science seems unlikely, but rather because in order to reduce the effects of climate change, Americans must change to a lifestyle that is “less desirable”. Maybe the way to change perceptions on climate change, and hopefully improve the growing issues caused by climate change, is tied to the way society sees those who live in inner cities and the lifestyle they live.
I agree with you on how the underprivileged actually somehow live “greener” than those who live in suburbia. Growing up in New York City, having a car, at times, was an inconvenience because of the parking situation. As a result, many people use public transportation which helps the environment to some degree. Conveniences have a cost and inner city residents cannot necessarily afford them. Ironically, these conveniences have an environmental cost as well.
I think that your comment about how those with low incomes are sometimes more environmentally friendly than those with high incomes was very interesting. I hadn’t thought about it that way. I think that sometimes it’s challenging to pick a less convenient, but more environmentally friendly option over a more convenient option. But we all need to be more environmentally friendly because we only have one planet, and right now we are destroying it for the sake of convenience.
I too enjoyed the discussion held by Professor Schmidt. I think one of the points you mention about reduced carbon footprint at Cornell University was very interesting. I never realized how nearly every facility we use is communal, whereas at home we have independent facilities. Additionally, I too was surprised by how few people lived in urban areas. Considering Cornell’s diverse population, I thought that there would be differences as to the types of communities we grew up in. Regardless, I thought the talk was both enlightening and interesting.