Urban greening roundup

I have a bunch of urban planning, urban greening, landscape architecture and engineering journals in my RSS feed. Sometimes a lot of time goes by in between articles that I find interesting. But today an interesting cluster popped up, so here are a handful of highlights. The words below are my musings, not necessarily a summary of the papers. Click through if you are interested.

  • From Landscape and Urban Planning, Intensifying drought threatens the heat-regulating capacity of urban vegetation: Trees, parks, and soil cool cities through both shade and evapotranspiration. But for evapotranspiration to work and for the vegetation to persist long-term, there has to be water. There are going to be some areas where there is not enough water in an absolute sense, and others where there is enough water in a year-round water balance sense, but it is not stored during wet periods and provided to the vegetation during the dry periods in between the wet periods. Then there will be some lucky areas that are both hot and have plenty of water most of the time, although even there you may have an infrequent drought severe enough to kill vegetation without irrigation.
  • From Earth’s Future, Urban Landscape Irrigation and the Future of Sustainable Cities: Compared to agriculture, irrigation in urban areas is very ad hoc and not very scientific. Beyond that, and I don’t know whether this article gets into it, a lot of irrigation is done with drinking water. In an ideal world, you would capture every drop of rainfall and use it for something useful. You would deliver and use drinkable water in homes and businesses as efficiently as practical, and treat the resulting wastewater only to the state necessary to use it for irrigation. Then you would theoretically irrigate only at the rate of evaporation. All this requires a level of plumbing and real-time control implemented in a million decentralized locations with different owners/stakeholders and different types of land use. Maybe some sort of positronic brain could help, but it’s a heavy lift in the near-term.
  • From Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, Assessing patterns and gaps in recent urban nature and biodiversity planning across 25 European cities: The European Union has taken a heavy-handed regulatory approach as it tends to do, requiring urban areas to develop and submit “Urban Nature Plans” for approval. This appeals to me as a proponent of both planning and managing urban ecosystem service provision. I like the idea of weaving green infrastructure planning into the bigger picture of urban infrastructure planning, then tying public infrastructure funding to implementation of projects that are consistent with the plan, particularly in times when private-sector growth slows down and there is a consensus that government economic stimulus is needed. This is all rational, evidence-based, and non-partisan in my mind. I also recognize it is nowhere near politically viable in the near term in the United States or oh-so-practical developed Asia, let alone developing countries.
  • From Trends in Ecology and Evolution, The carbon cost of forest fragmentation: Size matters: In my fantasy world of rational policies and plans, we can start thinking both about total habitat and habitat connectivity within and across cities. Here is some evidence that connectivity has a multiplier effect on carbon sequestration that goes beyond just size. It makes sense, if vegetation around the edges of habitat tends to be more stressed and less productive. Of course, there is a longstanding debate about the relationship between productivity, and biodiversity or habitat quality. An algae bloom or a hillside covered in kudzu is pretty productive, for example, and the opposite of biodiverse.
  • From Ecological Engineering, Assessing the role of wildlife ecological corridors in restoring functional connectivity of road-fragmented habitats using a stochastic movement model and scenario simulation: There is a fair amount known about corridors and connectivity, although not so much in urban environments. (I don’t normally toot my own horn, but since this is really something I have looked into that many others have not, feel free to have a look at Chapter 6 in my dissertation. No pressure. Some day I would love to distill this into a concise seminal academic paper, but I don’t have the bandwidth or library access these days.) People are starting to use agent-based, stochastic simulation in addition to older approaches based mostly on static land use/land cover analysis, which I find interesting.

the state of health in 1776

This article describes what even wealthy Americans would have gone through around the Revolutionary War era.

Lice abounded. Bed bugs interrupted sleep. Scabies, ringworm, rashes from numerous unknown sources and unwashed skin was wrapped in clothing of stiff linen, smelly woolens or coarse calico. The byproduct was irritated, itchy skin with the discomfort of scratches, scabs and the stink that accompanied it…

Doctors, following accepted practice, would likely have bled or purged an ill person for humoral balance. Surgeons washed their bloody hands in contaminated water and dried them on their equally bloody apron or clothes, unaware of germs…

When fluid accumulated from infection, a practitioner might use a small sharp spear nested in a metal tube, called a trocar and cannula. The pair were pushed into the body wherever swelling threatened a patient’s health, or exploration of an inner cavity was warranted. Then the doctor removed the perforating trocar, with its triangular shaped head, and left the cannula in place, as a conduit for fluids going in or coming out…

Ouch – yes, I will take my disinfected drinking water, safe food, (mostly) painless dentristry, and climate controlled house and office, thank you.

leap seconds

This just in – the Earth’s rotation speed is not perfectly constant, and it has recently sped up. This has to do with tiny changes in the relative movements of the Earth, Moon, and Sun. It probably has always been happening and we have just recently developed the technology to measure it more accurately.

…starting in 2016, Earth started to spin unusually fast.

For instance, on July 4 of 2024, Earth set a new record by completing its daily spin 1.66 milliseconds faster than usual. Around one year later on July 10, 2025, it spun 1.36 milliseconds faster than usual, with other shorter-than-usual days occurring on July 9 and July 22. This has led experts to warn about a “negative” leap second—subtracting a second from UTC—to keep UTC aligned with UT1 as early as 2029.

Subtracting a second doesn’t seem like that big a deal. I certainly remember a few seconds being added in my lifetime. But apparently, this has caused serious problems for modern infrastructure and industries such as computers, GPS, and banking. The decision is made by something called the General Conference on Weights and Measures, and the leap seconds were causing enough problems that they decided in 2022 not to add them any more. The solution they are considering is to add (or subtract? I had trouble following the article) a whole leap hour, which would have to be done much less frequently. It makes sense to me – over decades or centuries, I suppose not making the small time adjustments would result in astronomical events (solstices and equinoxes – what are the plurals of these words) and the weather eventually not matching the calendar (although let’s be honest, the weather is f-ed anyway…). That would actually happen pretty fast if we didn’t add the one leap day every four years – in my 50 year lifetime, the calendar would already be off by 10 days or so compared to the Earth’s actual journey around the sun.

Neil deGrasse Tyson has a good podcast that explains (along with some fart jokes) that this actually happened in the centuries after the Roman calendar was invented. At that time it became noticeable, the authority on timekeeping was the Pope, and the Pope decided to skip 10 days in October one year. Problem solved. (I suppose people outside the Catholic world had their own calendars, their own observations/calculations of astronomical events, and their own ways of dealing with these changes.) Even not considering the recent changes scientists are now able to measure, Tyson explains that there would need to be some additional adjustments from time to time.

Now, I say if we start messing with the calendar it is also time to go to 13 months, where each month has exactly 4 weeks, except there is an extra New Year’s Eve. Then every four years there can be two New Years Eveses. Let’s throw ourselves one little bone every four years and make leap day a holiday. Or maybe an election day which is also a holiday. It just makes sense. And to hell with daylight savings time! Let’s make it happen.

Albert Einstein – not the nicest guy?

Albert Einstein might not have been a guy you would want to sit down and have a beer with. He was happiest thinking alone in a quiet room (or entire house). His first marriage sounds quite rocky, although it lasted 16 years and produced three children. His second marriage was to a cousin – a first cousin, their mothers were sisters and she did not have to change her name because it was already Einstein. They did not have biological children, but she had two children from a previous marriage which he adopted. But of course, he is not known for developing any special or general theories of harmonious human social relations.

the case for an AI bubble

I feel like I’ve been at least somewhat of a cheerleader for the AI boom, so let’s talk a little bit about the case for an AI bubble. The Guardian talks about it mostly in stock valuation terms, with a little discussion of corporate debt.

In focus at the moment is the concentration of equity in just seven companies, the Magnificent Seven: Amazon, Alphabet (Google), Nvidia, Meta (Facebook), Microsoft, Apple and Tesla (possibly soon to merge with Elon Musk’s other venture, Space X)…

It is disturbing that the 10 largest companies in the S&P 500 account for about 40% of the index’s total market capitalisation, which is well above the 27% peak reached during the tech bubble of 1999-2000…

Yet the AI bubble has further to run because the top 10 are making huge profits, they have a US president who is prepared to lose wars to keep the financial markets happy, and the world is awash with savings looking for a home.

In my mind, we need to see an acceleration in real GDP growth and productivity growth to go along with this stock market surge, and then we might be able to hope for a soft landing. If I were much smarter I would make some kind of dashboard to look at all this data side by side. There must be smart people doing this, no?

the Dialog leak

Wired has published a leaked list of attendees to a conference organized by Dialog, a secret-ish group originally organized by Peter Thiel. It makes a fun seed for conspiracy theories, but I don’t think there is much here beyond another chance for the wealthy and powerful / Epstein class / tech bros / finance bros / military-industrial complex to get together and bask in each others’ presence. (Epstein himself literally attended this event although apparently, there is another guy named Jeff Epstein at birth through no fault of his own.) Are there secret decisions and deals made that control the world? Almost certainly, but probably made one-on-one or in smaller groups in bars and back rooms because it is convenient when these people are together in person.

AI boom or bubble (or both)?

The Bank of International Settlements sums up the AI bubble concerns pretty well.

the optimism surrounding AI may not last, despite its promise of future productivity gains. The current surge in capital expenditure could prove unsustainable if supply bottlenecks restrain production. Intense competition for market leadership may fuel overinvestment further, as seen in previous innovation waves, increasing the risk of a sharp reversal if AI payoffs disappoint.

The positive economics effects we have seen from AI so far may be mostly due to economic stimulus effects. Spend a massive amount on construction, whether of public infrastructure with public dollars or private capital with private dollars, and you get a big multiplier effect. This raises growth and potentially also inflation. Productivity gains from AI are expected by most people/experts, but the question is really the timing. If they obviously show up while hype is still high, the train rolls on. If they show up on a lag of years or decades, the bubble bursts and there is a significant period of pain before things gradually and hopefully permanently pick up again. This doesn’t matter to the wealthy and immortal among us, but to those of us in our last decade or so of work before retirement, it’s our lives!

I also wonder how long-lived these capital goods are. Public infrastructure operates for decades even if it gets somewhat obsolete compared to the latest and greatest new designs, but computer hardware evolves so fast I wonder if these massive data center buildings and their appurtenances are going to be operable a decade from now.

the current carbon price

According to academic meta-analyses, the carbon price should be in the range of $100-165 per (metric) tonne of carbon dioxide (equivalents, including other greenhouse gases adjusted for their impacts) emitted. Our World in Data found that about 30% of the world’s emissions are priced, which is up significantly but obviously still low. Uruguay, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Switzerland, and Hungary have charges in this range. The typical price across Western Europe is $65-90. Many countries that have a carbon price charge $10 or less. Still, I imagine getting a legal and administrative system in place is a big hurdle, and once you have one the price can be adjusted over time.

can we tell right from wrong?

Here are a bunch of videos on ethics and morality. The videos look neat for those with leisure time but full disclosure: too long, didn’t watch. Give me something to read, even if it is long, and I will skim for the key points relevant to me in a tiny fraction of the time I would have to invest in the video. By watching the video I am giving up time I could use to either skim more material and take in much more useful information, or time I could spend doing something else entirely that might be more informative, productive or enjoyable. I am not immortal, although luckily just dying at the normal slow speed (as far as I know).

It does mention religion as an underpinning of morality. I have been thinking though, let’s say we can agree to accept that there is such a thing as absolute right and wrong. We may not agree on what it is, but we can agree to work together toward discovering what it is. This is my understanding of common morality. And if there is such a thing as common morality, it makes total sense that mainstream religion tends to gravitate toward it over time. So the fact that centrist religious thought on morality seems to have commonalities across religions, and commonalities with moral thought outside religion, is not necessarily evidence that religion supports morality, but may in fact be the opposite, that common morality informs religion. And that is my deep thought for the day, which I arrived at independently but I am sure many others have arrived at before me.

the Aldi model

How Aldi can have such low prices:

  • minimize staff – a full-size grocery store has about six staff on duty
  • groceries are shelved in their boxes – they just more or less cut the fronts off
  • large and easy to find bar codes for scanning
  • a refundable quarter deposit to get a shopping cart? in my humble opinion maybe this meant something decades ago but it is a gimmick now, other than maybe in locations where shopping cart theft is common. Even then, a quarter is not much of a financial deterrent – perhaps a small psychological one.
  • They “stock only about 2,000 product lines” compared to say a Walmart which stocks over 100,000.

The article says they bring prices for all grocery stores within a 10-mile radius down by about 1%. Competitive markets are not completely debunked, it turns out…

I would add my own experience that in spite of all this, an Aldi is not a miserable place to shop, compared to say, a Wal-Mart or a traditional grocery store. Shoppers know they are putting up with minor inconveniences in exchange for rock-bottom prices. But the minor inconveniences (like time in line) are certainly no worse than a Wal-Mart, and probably not worse than a traditional grocery store. The lines look long, but they really do move them through quickly. They make the customer bring their own bags or boxes, and do their own bagging away from the checkout counter – but this is the trend at the major chains too. At least, making the customer do the work, I would argue minus the thought given to efficient spatial layout that gets a customer out of the checkout person’s and next customers way while they are bagging. I wouldn’t say the anecdotal, small-sample-size-collected-with-my-own-eyes employee happiness/grumpiness index is up to Trader Joe’s standard (do they hand out free MDMA to employees of something?), but again probably better than Walmart and no worse than a traditional grocery store. The big bar codes and better checkout layouts seem easy for the major chains to copy if they want to, while some of the other approaches would mean big changes in their business models and target customers (Aldi has a notable lack of grab-and-go sushi, for example).