The Brookings Institution today released a report ranking the nation’s 100 biggest metropolitan areas by their residents’ average carbon footprint—the amount of CO2 they are responsible for releasing based on vehicle transportation (including freight and personal) and home energy use.
City living is greener overall: Although two-thirds of the U.S. population lives in the 100 biggest urban areas, they are responsible for only 56 percent of the carbon emissions. These urbanites’ footprint is 14 percent less than the country average.
So… who are the winners and losers?
Here are the 10 metropolitan areas with the lowest carbon footprint…and the highest (per capita CO2 emissions in metric tons in parentheses):
BEST
1. Honolulu, HI (1.356)
2. Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA (1.413)
3. Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA (1.446 )
4. New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA (1.495)
5. Boise City-Nampa, ID (1.507)
6. Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA (1.556)
7. San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA (1.573)
8. San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA (1.585)
9. El Paso, TX (1.613)
10. San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA (1.630)
WORST
91. Knoxville, TN (3.134)
92. Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA (3.190)
93. Oklahoma City, OK (3.204)
94. St. Louis, MO-IL (3.217)
95. Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro, TN (3.222)
96. Louisville, KY-IN (3.233)
97. Toledo, OH (3.240)
98. Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN (3.281)
99. Indianapolis, IN (3.364)
100. Lexington-Fayette, KY (3.455)
Here in Minneapolis-St. Paul we rank 45th.
How dense the city is, how much home heating and cooling the city requires, and whether the city uses primarily coal or a less carbon-intensive form of energy all contribute to where it sits in the green rankings.
Check out the whole report here (click on "Download"), and the complete rankings, clicking on "Download Per Capita Footprints Supporting Material."






Recent Comments