solarpunk memes

2869 readers

915 users here now

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

ex_06@slrpnk.net

tsugu@slrpnk.net

Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net

859

Density saves nature (i.imgur.com)

submitted 2 months ago by TehBamski@lemmy.world to c/memes@slrpnk.net

404 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] aberrate_junior_beatnik@midwest.social 89 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

If the island were 100 times larger, the houses would take 1% of the land area, leaving 99%. The apartment complex would take up .04%, leaving 99.96%, which isn't much of an improvement. The proportions of our planet are much closer to my scenario than this made up island. That's a reason why we might not "prefer apartments in our own town."

There are good reasons you might want density, this just isn't one of them.

[–] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 44 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, but most people don't live in that other 90% . Most people live in urban and suburban areas where most if not all of the land is privately owned. Because of this the problem shown of fitting 100 households into 25 acres is way more common than your scenario of fitting 100 households on 2500 acres

[–] ChilledPeppers@lemmy.world 19 points 2 months ago

And having trees and nature near urban venters is very much desirable, to help with air pollution (tho really not a lot), heat concentration and humidity.

[–] Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc 25 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If the island were 100 times larger, the houses would take 1% of the land area, leaving 99%.

Singapore government: if only.

Also wildlife, carbon capturing, and distance to everything. There's reason why denser city is easier to go around, in this island, you might not even need a car.

[–] aberrate_junior_beatnik@midwest.social 3 points 2 months ago

Easier travel is definitely a great reason to increase density. Walking & biking > cars

[–] BussyCat@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

There is approximately 15.77B acres of livable land and there are 8.2B people so if each person had just 1/4 acre that would be 13% vs if you gave each person 2000 sqft it would only be 2%. Then you need to factor in how to built transit for low density and how many more stores you need due to the lower density and you can see that it would be much better for the environment if we had higher density