Out-Melting the New York Melting Pot: Global Warming’s Effects and Architectural Solutions
New York is known as a resilient melting pot of people and culture. But could it be out-melted by global warming? Could a great city be brought to its knees by the insidious melting of ice sheets and the unstoppable rise of sea level? What will happen if we do nothing to stop the devastation that global warming will cause?
Much of New York’s infrastructure is vulnerable to sea level rise. You can’t have a skyscraper without its foundation, and the subways are the main mode of transport in New York. Since most subways are below sea level, sea level rise will flood the tunnels. This example demonstrates that global warming will have enormous effects on coastal cities like New York, but there are ways that we can prevent global warming, and protect ourselves from the devastation that global warming will cause.
Ever since the Industrial Revolution humans have been releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere — changing the climate and the atmospheric composition. Most of this CO2 comes from burning fossil fuels. Greenhouse gasses like CO2 cause less of the heat the earth radiates to be emitted into space, thus causing the average surface temperature to increase. Besides this average increase in temperature, another effect is a rise in sea level from ice melting. Climate change will also trigger more hurricanes and storms with more destructive capabilities to coastal cities (Intergovernmental Panel on Climatechange). Jeff Goodell, an english writer for rolling stones, says, “Hurricane Sandy . . . was a transformative event. It did not just reveal how vulnerable New York is to a powerful storm, but it also gave a preview of what the city faces over the next century, when sea levels are projected to rise five, six, seven feet or more, causing Sandy-like flooding (or much worse) to occur with increasing frequency.” This temperature rise has effects not just on humans but other organisms, In her book, The Sixth Extinction, Elizabeth Kolbert writes that humanity could be the cause of the next big extinction. All of these devastating effects make the future of humanity look pretty bleak, especially with everything that is happening today in the political world. The current president, Donald Trump, plans to do nothing about the problem of global warming and wants to pull us from the Paris climate agreement. He claims that the climate agreement is taking away our jobs because it puts limit on coal and oil companies. Scott Pruitt, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, believes that humans are not the main source of CO2 in the atmosphere. If most of the U.S. government does not think that we cause global warming and that therefore we don’t need to do anything about it, we won’t take action to protect ourselves, and it will be harder to convince people to reduce their carbon footprint.
There are people who are working to find solutions and ways to prevent massive damage. But new buildings and technologies are only one part of the answer. People also need to accept that they might not be able to drive their two ton trucks to the store one mile away to get a five gram pack of jelly beans. The exhaust of these vehicles releases harmful gases that add to the greenhouse effect. Even electric cars aren’t perfect, because the electricity they use usually comes from power plants. These power plants burn coal, oil, or natural gas and thus release more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere (Intergovernmental Panel on Climatechange).
New buildings designed by architect Vincent Callebaut could help take CO2 out of the atmosphere and make sustainable food and energy, all without releasing harmful gasses into the atmosphere. He is an architect who has designed fifty sustainable projects in ten years. All of these designs are sustainable, futuristic, graceful, and beautiful. Many of his projects incorporate nature and provide food, energy, or other resources. One problem he is trying to assess is that in the city of New York, people's food usually comes from outside the city and has to be shipped on planes or trucks. These transport methods use fossil fuels and release CO2 into the atmosphere; because most of the food is frozen, additional energy is required. All of this pre-packaged, pre-cooked, and pre-prepared food could be replaced with fresh produce. As a solution to this problem, Vincent Callebaut has designed the Dragonfly. This proposed building allows food to be grown vertically inside the city of New York. These designs will make cities less dependent on the countryside and more self sustainable. The plants in the Dragonfly also take CO2 from the atmosphere and pollution from the air of the city. Rainwater is collected, filtered, and recycled through the plants in the Dragonfly. The water is then infused with nutrients and runs through the roots of the plants. There is no soil, just recycled water. If buildings like the Dragonfly with vertical farms were spread around the world, then the land that is devoted to farms could be used for other applications such as solar and wind farms or just more land for cities and other housing (Callebaut).
The Dragonfly project removes CO2 from the atmosphere, so spreading this design around the world could reduce the greenhouse effect. But we will still have the underlying problem of global warming. What will we do if sea level rise, hurricanes, droughts, floods, and increasing heat waves become catastrophic? One solution involves another project by Vincent Callebaut called “Aequorea.” It is a floating water city, “an ocean scraper.” Aequorea is based on the jellyfish that goes by the same name. These floating cities rely on the ocean for most of their resources. They use ocean currents for power, luminescent algae for light, and algae, fish and terrestrial vegetation grown on top of the floating buildings for food. Each Aequorea can hold up to 20,000 people. They are anchored, and on the floor of the ocean below them there are ocean turbines and an undersea lab. In the walls of the structure there is algae to absorb CO2 emitted by people's breathing, and the algae also recycle the liquid and solid waste produced by people. This algae along with the farms and water turbines, means that these little islands are entirely self sustainable. If land becomes uninhabitable to humans, then we might have to resort to this or other ocean-based housing. Also, if sea level rises and the cities close to the coast become submerged, the people living there could temporarily live on these islands. The current model of the Aequorea is designed for the coast of Brazil, off Rio de Janeiro. The future of humanity may rest on floating cities like these if land becomes uninhabitable for humans. Another reason that the ocean might hold our future is that food from the sea would also be critical, with fish, shellfish, and sea plant life being the most sustainable food sources (Callebaut).
When sea level rises, it rises all over the world. In London, tidal surges can already flood the river Thames. For the people who live on the river banks, tidal surges could flood the front of their houses. But the Thames barrier protects people's houses from flooding. The barrier was built to protect 125 square kilometers from flooding caused by tidal surges when the water is pushed up the river. The barrier is made of ten steel gates that close to prevent flooding. When the gates are not in use, they lie on the river bed, not affecting the river. They need around ninety minutes to open or close, turning on huge hydraulic wheels. The Thames barrier reduces the surge by a few inches, which might not seem like much, but could be the elevation difference from the river to a house on the river banks. The effect is felt for twelve miles up the river. The construction of the barrier started in 1974 and opened in 1984. It was constructed to last until 2030, but some predictions show that it could last until 2060-70. For much of the history of London, the Thames river would flood periodically, but now with rising sea levels, the tidal surges are even more severe. In 1920, fourteen people drowned in a flood and London streets were filled with about four feet of water. The Thames barrier has already prevented multiple floods and will prevent more in the future (deCastella).
All of these projects look compelling on paper, but out of the three, only the Thames barrier has actually been built. The reasons for this include resource and financial cost, logistical problems, and that many people just don’t want change in any form. Most people don’t understand that if change takes away something from them in the moment, it will give back something much better than what it took away. The cost of these structures might seem huge. The Dragonfly consists of mostly metal and glass, and most of Vincent Callebaut’s other work consists of wood, but the main beauty of his work is made up of plants, which are very inexpensive. The Dragonfly is like a normal building with its materials, and so its cost will be similar to other skyscrapers. But Aequorea is different, because it is made of a composite of algae and plastic from the mid-Pacific gyre, or what Callebaut calls: “The seventh continent.” This composite could also be used for other buildings, but right now, the only building designed with it is Aequorea. This has almost no material cost but still has a cost for construction, technology, and making the composite (Callebaut). Even with the buildings that are made of normal materials, the price will be balanced out by the building in the future. His buildings provide energy, food and living space that people will want to pay more for because of how advanced they are. The reason that the Thames barrier was built, but not the Dragonfly or Aequorea, is that most people only think in the present and don’t look into the future. Aequorea will only be needed if we need more living space or if coastal cities are flooded.
We really need to think about what the future could hold for us. What would happen if we do not work to prevent climate change at all, and what could happen if we really try to reach for the far future?
Our future will mostly be determined by the balance of the energy we consume and the energy we can produce. Energy production and consumption can give us a good idea of what the future will look like. A Russian astronomer, Nikolai Kardashev, designed a scale for types of civilization, not surprisingly, called the Kardashev scale. It stated that there were three ranks of civilizations, according to how much energy they can harvest from different resources. Sadly, we are not even at type one yet, so you probably won’t see a space age civilization in your lifetime. A type one civilization is a civilization that harvests all available energy from their home planet, including: fossil fuels, hydro, wind, geothermal, and most importantly, solar. We don’t necessarily have to use all the energy from the earth. We would just need the equivalent amount of energy from other non-planetary sources then we would still be considered a type one civilization. A type two civilization is one that can collect all the energy from its neighboring star (for us, that would be the sun). Energy production like this would require a structure like a Dyson sphere, which is a spherical object that wraps around the sun, approximately at Earth’s distance. Another way to harvest all available energy from the sun would be to harvest its fusion power. Harvesting the fusion energy from the sun would require complete control over fusion energy, which, obviously we don’t have yet. Some places are experimenting with fusion technology, such as ITER in Southern France, where they are trying to construct a fusion reactor. If a working fusion reactor is made, then that would be an amazing source of energy (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor). Since we cannot even master a small fusion reactor, it will be a long time before we can operate a fusion reactor such as the sun. But, with this power, we could have the power to vaporize asteroids or move another planet in the way to collide instead. After a type two, it starts to get a little unimaginable. A type three civilization is one that controls the energy of the entire galaxy, controlling every sun and solar system. A civilization like this might inhabit a supermassive black hole, like the one in the center of our galaxy. They would be able to create, destroy, and maneuver planets, suns, and entire solar systems; merging them into massive planetary systems or maybe they would be able to do things that we can’t even comprehend yet (Creighton).
But back to NYC. Other people think about how to design cities just for the next couple of decades. For example, architects Gregg Pasquarelli and Vishaan Chakrabarti go through a list of ways to improve New York in the next ten or twenty years. These two architects, decide to “Give New York City a Makeover.” The first thing that they would change is the parks. Instead of having one Central Park, they decided that they would rather have two larger parks along the sides of New York, with industrial places outside and the living and working spaces between the two parks. They state that the subway system, the main way of transportation, has some flaws. It needs to be more even around the city, because it leads to more expensive and less expensive places; where there are more subway stops, it is more expensive because people don’t want to have to walk to get to the subway, and vice versa. The next idea that they have takes no new infrastructure but might be the hardest advancement to make. It would involve taking away all privately owned cars in New York. Removing privately owned cars from New York streets would clear up space along side roads that could be used for green space for bikers and pedestrians. There is also no real need for privately owned cars in New York, there are so many other ways to get around New York — the subway, busses, taxies, and even walking — that every person doesn’t need to own a car. Gregg Pasquarelli and Vishaaney Chakrabarti don’t believe that the city is hopeless, but they do believe it is falling behind the rest of the world; it is still the great city of opportunities.
Will we rise above the problem of global warming and flourish into a space age civilization? Will this be the barrier that will cause the end of the human race? Or, will we be stuck here in the age of concrete, never growing, never changing, and never dying? This will be decided with our actions and with our science. Everyone will have to participate if we will climb over this wall, but we don’t know what will be on the other side, prosperity or another large wall that is invisible to us right now. We will have to see.
Ever since the Industrial Revolution humans have been releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere — changing the climate and the atmospheric composition. Most of this CO2 comes from burning fossil fuels. Greenhouse gasses like CO2 cause less of the heat the earth radiates to be emitted into space, thus causing the average surface temperature to increase. Besides this average increase in temperature, another effect is a rise in sea level from ice melting. Climate change will also trigger more hurricanes and storms with more destructive capabilities to coastal cities (Intergovernmental Panel on Climatechange). Jeff Goodell, an english writer for rolling stones, says, “Hurricane Sandy . . . was a transformative event. It did not just reveal how vulnerable New York is to a powerful storm, but it also gave a preview of what the city faces over the next century, when sea levels are projected to rise five, six, seven feet or more, causing Sandy-like flooding (or much worse) to occur with increasing frequency.” This temperature rise has effects not just on humans but other organisms, In her book, The Sixth Extinction, Elizabeth Kolbert writes that humanity could be the cause of the next big extinction. All of these devastating effects make the future of humanity look pretty bleak, especially with everything that is happening today in the political world. The current president, Donald Trump, plans to do nothing about the problem of global warming and wants to pull us from the Paris climate agreement. He claims that the climate agreement is taking away our jobs because it puts limit on coal and oil companies. Scott Pruitt, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, believes that humans are not the main source of CO2 in the atmosphere. If most of the U.S. government does not think that we cause global warming and that therefore we don’t need to do anything about it, we won’t take action to protect ourselves, and it will be harder to convince people to reduce their carbon footprint.
There are people who are working to find solutions and ways to prevent massive damage. But new buildings and technologies are only one part of the answer. People also need to accept that they might not be able to drive their two ton trucks to the store one mile away to get a five gram pack of jelly beans. The exhaust of these vehicles releases harmful gases that add to the greenhouse effect. Even electric cars aren’t perfect, because the electricity they use usually comes from power plants. These power plants burn coal, oil, or natural gas and thus release more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere (Intergovernmental Panel on Climatechange).
New buildings designed by architect Vincent Callebaut could help take CO2 out of the atmosphere and make sustainable food and energy, all without releasing harmful gasses into the atmosphere. He is an architect who has designed fifty sustainable projects in ten years. All of these designs are sustainable, futuristic, graceful, and beautiful. Many of his projects incorporate nature and provide food, energy, or other resources. One problem he is trying to assess is that in the city of New York, people's food usually comes from outside the city and has to be shipped on planes or trucks. These transport methods use fossil fuels and release CO2 into the atmosphere; because most of the food is frozen, additional energy is required. All of this pre-packaged, pre-cooked, and pre-prepared food could be replaced with fresh produce. As a solution to this problem, Vincent Callebaut has designed the Dragonfly. This proposed building allows food to be grown vertically inside the city of New York. These designs will make cities less dependent on the countryside and more self sustainable. The plants in the Dragonfly also take CO2 from the atmosphere and pollution from the air of the city. Rainwater is collected, filtered, and recycled through the plants in the Dragonfly. The water is then infused with nutrients and runs through the roots of the plants. There is no soil, just recycled water. If buildings like the Dragonfly with vertical farms were spread around the world, then the land that is devoted to farms could be used for other applications such as solar and wind farms or just more land for cities and other housing (Callebaut).
The Dragonfly project removes CO2 from the atmosphere, so spreading this design around the world could reduce the greenhouse effect. But we will still have the underlying problem of global warming. What will we do if sea level rise, hurricanes, droughts, floods, and increasing heat waves become catastrophic? One solution involves another project by Vincent Callebaut called “Aequorea.” It is a floating water city, “an ocean scraper.” Aequorea is based on the jellyfish that goes by the same name. These floating cities rely on the ocean for most of their resources. They use ocean currents for power, luminescent algae for light, and algae, fish and terrestrial vegetation grown on top of the floating buildings for food. Each Aequorea can hold up to 20,000 people. They are anchored, and on the floor of the ocean below them there are ocean turbines and an undersea lab. In the walls of the structure there is algae to absorb CO2 emitted by people's breathing, and the algae also recycle the liquid and solid waste produced by people. This algae along with the farms and water turbines, means that these little islands are entirely self sustainable. If land becomes uninhabitable to humans, then we might have to resort to this or other ocean-based housing. Also, if sea level rises and the cities close to the coast become submerged, the people living there could temporarily live on these islands. The current model of the Aequorea is designed for the coast of Brazil, off Rio de Janeiro. The future of humanity may rest on floating cities like these if land becomes uninhabitable for humans. Another reason that the ocean might hold our future is that food from the sea would also be critical, with fish, shellfish, and sea plant life being the most sustainable food sources (Callebaut).
When sea level rises, it rises all over the world. In London, tidal surges can already flood the river Thames. For the people who live on the river banks, tidal surges could flood the front of their houses. But the Thames barrier protects people's houses from flooding. The barrier was built to protect 125 square kilometers from flooding caused by tidal surges when the water is pushed up the river. The barrier is made of ten steel gates that close to prevent flooding. When the gates are not in use, they lie on the river bed, not affecting the river. They need around ninety minutes to open or close, turning on huge hydraulic wheels. The Thames barrier reduces the surge by a few inches, which might not seem like much, but could be the elevation difference from the river to a house on the river banks. The effect is felt for twelve miles up the river. The construction of the barrier started in 1974 and opened in 1984. It was constructed to last until 2030, but some predictions show that it could last until 2060-70. For much of the history of London, the Thames river would flood periodically, but now with rising sea levels, the tidal surges are even more severe. In 1920, fourteen people drowned in a flood and London streets were filled with about four feet of water. The Thames barrier has already prevented multiple floods and will prevent more in the future (deCastella).
All of these projects look compelling on paper, but out of the three, only the Thames barrier has actually been built. The reasons for this include resource and financial cost, logistical problems, and that many people just don’t want change in any form. Most people don’t understand that if change takes away something from them in the moment, it will give back something much better than what it took away. The cost of these structures might seem huge. The Dragonfly consists of mostly metal and glass, and most of Vincent Callebaut’s other work consists of wood, but the main beauty of his work is made up of plants, which are very inexpensive. The Dragonfly is like a normal building with its materials, and so its cost will be similar to other skyscrapers. But Aequorea is different, because it is made of a composite of algae and plastic from the mid-Pacific gyre, or what Callebaut calls: “The seventh continent.” This composite could also be used for other buildings, but right now, the only building designed with it is Aequorea. This has almost no material cost but still has a cost for construction, technology, and making the composite (Callebaut). Even with the buildings that are made of normal materials, the price will be balanced out by the building in the future. His buildings provide energy, food and living space that people will want to pay more for because of how advanced they are. The reason that the Thames barrier was built, but not the Dragonfly or Aequorea, is that most people only think in the present and don’t look into the future. Aequorea will only be needed if we need more living space or if coastal cities are flooded.
We really need to think about what the future could hold for us. What would happen if we do not work to prevent climate change at all, and what could happen if we really try to reach for the far future?
Our future will mostly be determined by the balance of the energy we consume and the energy we can produce. Energy production and consumption can give us a good idea of what the future will look like. A Russian astronomer, Nikolai Kardashev, designed a scale for types of civilization, not surprisingly, called the Kardashev scale. It stated that there were three ranks of civilizations, according to how much energy they can harvest from different resources. Sadly, we are not even at type one yet, so you probably won’t see a space age civilization in your lifetime. A type one civilization is a civilization that harvests all available energy from their home planet, including: fossil fuels, hydro, wind, geothermal, and most importantly, solar. We don’t necessarily have to use all the energy from the earth. We would just need the equivalent amount of energy from other non-planetary sources then we would still be considered a type one civilization. A type two civilization is one that can collect all the energy from its neighboring star (for us, that would be the sun). Energy production like this would require a structure like a Dyson sphere, which is a spherical object that wraps around the sun, approximately at Earth’s distance. Another way to harvest all available energy from the sun would be to harvest its fusion power. Harvesting the fusion energy from the sun would require complete control over fusion energy, which, obviously we don’t have yet. Some places are experimenting with fusion technology, such as ITER in Southern France, where they are trying to construct a fusion reactor. If a working fusion reactor is made, then that would be an amazing source of energy (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor). Since we cannot even master a small fusion reactor, it will be a long time before we can operate a fusion reactor such as the sun. But, with this power, we could have the power to vaporize asteroids or move another planet in the way to collide instead. After a type two, it starts to get a little unimaginable. A type three civilization is one that controls the energy of the entire galaxy, controlling every sun and solar system. A civilization like this might inhabit a supermassive black hole, like the one in the center of our galaxy. They would be able to create, destroy, and maneuver planets, suns, and entire solar systems; merging them into massive planetary systems or maybe they would be able to do things that we can’t even comprehend yet (Creighton).
But back to NYC. Other people think about how to design cities just for the next couple of decades. For example, architects Gregg Pasquarelli and Vishaan Chakrabarti go through a list of ways to improve New York in the next ten or twenty years. These two architects, decide to “Give New York City a Makeover.” The first thing that they would change is the parks. Instead of having one Central Park, they decided that they would rather have two larger parks along the sides of New York, with industrial places outside and the living and working spaces between the two parks. They state that the subway system, the main way of transportation, has some flaws. It needs to be more even around the city, because it leads to more expensive and less expensive places; where there are more subway stops, it is more expensive because people don’t want to have to walk to get to the subway, and vice versa. The next idea that they have takes no new infrastructure but might be the hardest advancement to make. It would involve taking away all privately owned cars in New York. Removing privately owned cars from New York streets would clear up space along side roads that could be used for green space for bikers and pedestrians. There is also no real need for privately owned cars in New York, there are so many other ways to get around New York — the subway, busses, taxies, and even walking — that every person doesn’t need to own a car. Gregg Pasquarelli and Vishaaney Chakrabarti don’t believe that the city is hopeless, but they do believe it is falling behind the rest of the world; it is still the great city of opportunities.
Will we rise above the problem of global warming and flourish into a space age civilization? Will this be the barrier that will cause the end of the human race? Or, will we be stuck here in the age of concrete, never growing, never changing, and never dying? This will be decided with our actions and with our science. Everyone will have to participate if we will climb over this wall, but we don’t know what will be on the other side, prosperity or another large wall that is invisible to us right now. We will have to see.
Works Cited
Callebaut, Vincent. “Aequorea.” Vincent Callebaut. Vincent Callebaut Architectures, 2015. Web.
5 Mar 2017.
---. “Dragonfly.” Vincent Callebaut. Vincent Callebaut Architectures, 2009. Web.
5 Mar 2017.
Creighton, Jolene . “A Brief Explanation of the Kardashev Scale: How Far Can Humanity Really
Advance?” Futurism. Futurism, 1 Sept 2016. Web. 20 Mar. 2017.
deCastella, Tom. ‘’How does the Thames Barrier stop London flooding?” BBC. BBC, 11 Feb
2014. Web. 5 Mar 2017.
Goodell, Jeff. “Can New York Be Saved in the Era of Global Warming?” Rolling Stone. Rolling
Stone, 5 Jul 2016. Web. 6 Mar. 2017.
Held, Isaac. “Robust Responses of the Hydrological Cycle to Global Warming.” Journal of
Climate 19 (2006) n. Pag. Web. 20 Mar 2017.
International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor. International Thermonuclear Experimental
Reactor. ITER, 2017. Web. 22 Mar 2017.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climatechange. Intergovernmental Panel on Climatechange. IPCC,
2017. Web. 22 Mar 2017.
Kolbert, Elizabeth. The Sixth Extinction. London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2014. Print.
Pasquarelli, Gregg and Chakrabarti, Vishaan. “Two Architects Give NYC a Makeover.”
YouTube. Youtube and WIRED, 27 Oct. 2015. Web. 5 Mar 2017.
Callebaut, Vincent. “Aequorea.” Vincent Callebaut. Vincent Callebaut Architectures, 2015. Web.
5 Mar 2017.
---. “Dragonfly.” Vincent Callebaut. Vincent Callebaut Architectures, 2009. Web.
5 Mar 2017.
Creighton, Jolene . “A Brief Explanation of the Kardashev Scale: How Far Can Humanity Really
Advance?” Futurism. Futurism, 1 Sept 2016. Web. 20 Mar. 2017.
deCastella, Tom. ‘’How does the Thames Barrier stop London flooding?” BBC. BBC, 11 Feb
2014. Web. 5 Mar 2017.
Goodell, Jeff. “Can New York Be Saved in the Era of Global Warming?” Rolling Stone. Rolling
Stone, 5 Jul 2016. Web. 6 Mar. 2017.
Held, Isaac. “Robust Responses of the Hydrological Cycle to Global Warming.” Journal of
Climate 19 (2006) n. Pag. Web. 20 Mar 2017.
International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor. International Thermonuclear Experimental
Reactor. ITER, 2017. Web. 22 Mar 2017.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climatechange. Intergovernmental Panel on Climatechange. IPCC,
2017. Web. 22 Mar 2017.
Kolbert, Elizabeth. The Sixth Extinction. London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2014. Print.
Pasquarelli, Gregg and Chakrabarti, Vishaan. “Two Architects Give NYC a Makeover.”
YouTube. Youtube and WIRED, 27 Oct. 2015. Web. 5 Mar 2017.