Cities are good for you and for the planet

I just finished the book The Ghost Map by Steven Johnson (which means, dear friend and debate partner, I can return it when we next do lunch). It's the story of the deadly cholera outbreak in London in 1854 and how physician John Snow and cleric Henry Whitehead figured out what caused it. At the time London was not very good at human waste management and the top scientists of the day were convinced that stink -- the actual smell -- caused illness, which is the miasma theory. The author does a good job of explaining why that theory persisted for so long. Snow and Whitehead produced a map indicating where people died and were able to trace the illness to a contaminated water pump, and even to how the pump was made foul. This was remarkable medical sleuthing for the day. Along the way we learn about the fledgling municipal health department whose first major project caused large numbers of deaths because it wasn't based on sound science.

As fascinating as all that was my favorite chapter was the last one in which author discusses the results of that map on cities of today and on into the future. It took perhaps a decade for London to build proper sewers, but once done cholera never reappeared there. The two researchers changed London, which was seen to be close to collapse and at the mercy of epidemics, and made it sustainable, even as the population increased 6 times (2.5 million to 14 million). And now cities, at least in developed countries, are quite safe and have many advantages over suburbs and rural areas.

In 1854 less than 10% of the world's population lived in cities. We're now at about 50% of all people living in cities and we may soon go as high as 80%. City life has transformed our lives more than anything else. Some advantages of cities:
* They are engines of wealth, innovation, and creativity.
* They are also engines of health -- proper care is much more available in cities than in rural areas. The best hospitals are in cities.
* People packed in cities have a much smaller environmental impact than the same number spread across the countryside. And, yes, it is possible to have healthy neighborhoods without many trees. The smaller impact includes efficiencies in transportation in a place where most walk or take public transport (alas, then there is Detroit).
* People in cities tend to have smaller families. As we gather in cities the population should peak at 8 billion in 2050 and then start to drop.
* Culture in cities is more diverse -- no matter your interest it is much easier to find someone to share it with and have a sufficient support base to fund it.

Are there threats to urbanization? Yes, but not the usual culprits.
* In spite of the advantages of telecommuting, the best place for face-to-face action is still the city.
* Global warming and sea level rise? Yes, lots of cities will be affected, but that won't move us back to the country, we'll just rebuild the cities on higher ground.
* Fuel shortage? See the note above about environmental impact.

These threats remain to the city-planet.
* Asymmetrical warfare and the suitcase nuke and biological or chemical weapons. One might not deter us from gathering into cities, but several will.
* A truly serious pandemic, one that kills in the tens or hundreds of thousands. However, our ability to roll out a vaccine is improving rapidly.

No, that doesn't mean I'm about to give up my little corner of suburbia and move into the city. New York -- maybe. Detroit -- I'm close enough. Though I like being able to ride my bicycle around the area there is still the disadvantage that I have to drive to a lot of places, even those just a couple miles away.


Appropriate for a discussion of cholera: Giant microbe plush toys. These are stuffed critters, about 4 inches in size, made in the shape of harmful microbes. Common cold and malaria are among the several that are included, alas cholera isn't. Teddy bears are so passé.