{"content":[{"text":"Submission to the Planetizen website \n The unedited article below was submitted as an op-ed piece to the Planetizen \n website, the best-known world website patronised by planners favouring high- \n density. The edited version that was run can be seen on \n http://www.planetizen.com/node/42927.","bbox":{"left":0.151205,"top":0.089927,"width":0.6921539999999999,"height":0.098324}},{"text":"Resisting Dickensian Gloom \n AUTHOR: TONY RECSEI","bbox":{"left":0.29011,"top":0.225466,"width":0.41971100000000006,"height":0.05513699999999999}},{"text":"There has been a tremendous response to my introduction to the \n Demographia Survey. Many have asked me to expand upon the arguments \n and provide documentation (such as Dudley in this space), which was not \n possible in a preface. This I am pleased to do.","bbox":{"left":0.151205,"top":0.308052,"width":0.6712189999999999,"height":0.06874999999999998}},{"text":"Greenhouse gas emissions. Advocates of high-density policies (often \n termed “Smart Growth” but also under other descriptions and euphemisms \n such as “urban consolidation”, “compact development”, “growth management” \n and “urban renewal”) maintain these policies save energy and reduce \n greenhouse gas emissions. \n A comprehensive study of per capita emissions based on household \n consumption of all products and services appears in the Australian \n Conservation Foundation’s Consumption Atlas. Unexpectedly this analysis \n shows that greenhouse gas emissions of those living in high-density areas are \n greater than for those living in low-density areas. An analysis of the data1 \n shows that the average carbon dioxide equivalent emission of the high- \n density core areas of Australian cities is 27.9 tonnes per person whereas that \n for the low-density outer areas is 17.5 tonnes per person. \n As mentioned in the Demographia Survey introduction, food and goods \n purchased account for most of the emissions and this amounts to more for \n wealthier inner-city dwellers. \n Surprisingly, transport emissions amount to very little (only10.5%), household \n electricity and heating fuel being about twice as much at 20.0%2. It should \n also be noted that the emissions from household dwelling construction and \n renovations at 11.8% are greater than emissions for transport. It is clear that \n transport, so heavily emphasised by Smart Growth advocates, is responsible \n for only a small fraction of household emissions. \n Interestingly, using regression analysis to attempt to isolate variables \n influencing household emissions, the paper on which the data is based3 finds \n that density, as an isolated variable, has practically no effect on total energy \n requirements. The paper also finds that density has little effect on the per \n person energy requirement for mobility and automotive fuel consumption.","bbox":{"left":0.151205,"top":0.404251,"width":0.696766,"height":0.4742139999999999}}],"images_bbox":[],"images_bbox_not_text_overlap":[]}