Cities to the Rescue

As nations dither on meaningful steps to combat climate change, localities are stepping in with their own measures to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

In the city that never sleeps, the lights burn all night. And New York City needs energy for those lights, as well as for heating, air-conditioning and many other services. To meet these demands, the Big Apple belched nearly 60 million metric tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere in 2005.

Eight years later, despite a rise in population and new construction, emissions of greenhouse gas pollution had dropped by more than 11 million metric tons. How did Gotham manage to go so green? By banning the dirtiest oil used for heating and benefiting from a switch to natural gas for generating electricity.

New York is not alone in taking climate change seriously. Cities across the globe are stepping into the leadership vacuum left by nations, which have failed to take meaningful action on global warming for more than two decades. Coastal cities, which are particularly vulnerable to sea-level rise and other ill effects of rising temperatures, are leading the charge. Copenhagen, Melbourne and a handful of others have laid plans to go carbon-neutral. The “Compact of Mayors,” a group of 228 cities representing 436 million citizens around the world made commitments at the United Nations Climate Summit earlier this year to avoid two billion metric tons of greenhouse gas pollution per year. Even Chinese cities are in on the action: cap-and-trade markets for carbon pollution opened in 2013 in seven regions, including Shenzhen, which reduced carbon dioxide emissions by 2.5 million metric tons this past year, says Vice Mayor Tang Jie.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


That forward motion is in contrast to China's failure as a nation to reduce carbon intensity—the pollution associated with economic activity—as it promised in the five-year plan that ends next year. China, the U.S. and the rest of the world spew more than 36 billion metric tons of greenhouse gases a year—and the number continues to rise.

In response to this lack of progress, at least 100,000 people took to the streets of New York this past September to demand action from leaders. Participants in the People's Climate March expressed hope that when country representatives meet in Paris in December 2015 for the 21st iteration of international talks, they will hash out a new, legally binding treaty to curb emissions. Many climate policy experts fear the meeting will not achieve nearly enough, however.

Regardless of how international talks go, the world's cities could cut eight billion metric tons of greenhouse gases by 2050, according to an analysis by the C40 group of cities. That is significant but delivers only slightly more than the Montreal Protocol of 1987, the single biggest step ever taken to restrain climate change. That one treaty accomplished what it would take hundreds of local laws to do. An international solution is important, but until one arrives, the cities will strive to keep the lights on and the pollution down.

FURTHER READINGS AND CITATIONSScientificAmerican.com/dec2014/advances

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe