[Environment] Sewage, water, and electricity lines don’t require n^2 sprawl
[Livelihood] Better public transportation
[Livelihood] Closer to nature (your image is a joke and not how most house-based neighborhoods look)
It’s easy to see big cities like NYC and think “that’s bad for the environment”, but it’s easier to forget how much worse it would be if everyone lived in houses.
How many walable citys do you know with fewer cars, preserving extra space (Parks are no woods or nature), a good public transport and closer to nature?
How to make a big building energy autonom? Big aglomerations are not the way.
Energy by nuclear is a joke for several reasons. Even if you show the article from the gov, which shurly is objective and independent, the realyty is other. Come to Europe and see the problems with nukes they had and its form of housing.
How many walable citys do you know with fewer cars, preserving extra space (Parks are no woods or nature), a good public transport and closer to nature?
I live in SE Asia and the answer is “almost all of them”
You’re completely ignoring just about every other reason apartments are better.
It’s easy to see big cities like NYC and think “that’s bad for the environment”, but it’s easier to forget how much worse it would be if everyone lived in houses.
And to the point of energy - Use nuclear.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/housing/articles/energyefficiencyofhousinginenglandandwales/2021 ↩︎
How many walable citys do you know with fewer cars, preserving extra space (Parks are no woods or nature), a good public transport and closer to nature? How to make a big building energy autonom? Big aglomerations are not the way. Energy by nuclear is a joke for several reasons. Even if you show the article from the gov, which shurly is objective and independent, the realyty is other. Come to Europe and see the problems with nukes they had and its form of housing.
I live in SE Asia and the answer is “almost all of them”