Priligy online now, save money

DEC 08

Recent Comment

"A city where people don't need road or rail? Think of what a huge diff..."

View all Comments

New Green City Proposed For South Korea



Sometimes I get the feeling that all the people who used to draw concept art for Star Wars have all quit their jobs and http://vignovin.com/cheepest-levitra jumped on usefull link buy generic cialis from india the green architecture bandwagon. Not that this is a bad thing – when it comes to making the future a reality, I say there’s no better time than the present.

The new city proposed by the sfachc.org Dutch firm MVRDV is certainly futuristic. Its buildings are giant mounds of varying pointy-ness awash in greenery. The city, large enough to brand viagra professional hold some 77,000 people, circumvents the need for any kind of road or rail by bringing everything a person could need – housing, workplace, entertainment, shopping, etc. – within walking distance. The firm explains that the purpose of visitkansascityks.com the rising concentric circles is www.kachinwomen.com to provide all inhabitants with a terrace upon which to grow the hedges seen in the picture above. The hedges, in turn, help with the building’s ventilation and are fed with water leftover from other uses.

If the Urban Innovation Corporation of Gyeonggi province in South Korea decides that they like the seyonic.com proposal, and that it is feasible, construction could start by 2011.

Via Inhabitat

Hits: 19356
Comments (11)Add Comment
0
...
written by Avi Kaplan, December 08, 2008
Thanks for sharing Yoni. The graphic makes it seem fanciful, but really it's not that far from the rooftop gardens already sprouting up in a lot of cities in the US now.
0
...
written by Clinch, December 08, 2008
I think this is more about using plants and greenery for decoration, rather than something that will actually make peoples lives significantly more eco.

It does look cool and futuristic, but a lot of artistic renderings do, and then the actual thing doesn't look nearly as good, but here's hoping this one does.
0
...
written by Forest Dweller, December 08, 2008
The best way to be green is to not build anything new. Put the effort into renovating already existing cities to be green.
0
...
written by Jiwon, December 09, 2008
They take down the houses in the country side and build these kind of apartments on the land that previously had small houses on them.
Maybe it is worth putting 77,000 people a new home, and building it a bit greener, but It's not too fun for those who had owned the house for over 10 years.
0
Doubtful
written by Steve, December 09, 2008
Seeing as how the norm is celebrated here in South Korea, I doubt that if the visit our site buy levitra online canadian phamacy actual construction plans look anything like the rendering that it would pass.
0
Well, it IS colored green...
written by meteechart, December 10, 2008
Why do so many future-city imaginers seem to look straight back to no prescription Le Corbusier?

(Do a Google image search for "Le Corbusier ideal city".)

I think a lot of people in the urban U.S. associate Corbusier's stand alone towers amongst greenery with their failed manifestation in low-income housing projects.

Chicago tore down all of its Project towers in favor of (not very well or justly implemented) mixed income, mixed use community plans. I think "green" plans should do the same.
0
...
written by Doug, December 11, 2008
Ant hills.
0
Unlimited Human Reproduction, Endless Gr
written by Pete, December 18, 2008
What's going to work best for ALL of us - in personal terms, and in terms of business, education, the environment and peace?

Until we start asking questions that unify, empower and inform us, we'll continue to mindlessly follow the lead of our sex and levitra cialis viagra price hunger drives, which results in unlimited human reproduction and endless growth. We need to be honest with ourselves and consciously manage our energy, not let IT manage us.
0
President
written by Robert B. Torno, January 06, 2009
Researching for greener environment.
0
What's wrong with you people?
written by Ulrike, January 17, 2009
I can't believe there hasn't been a single positive comment on this. One of discount cialis the biggest problems cities are facing today is traffic - it eats up resources, space, and your personal time and life quality. It's ugly, noisy, polluting, and basically unnecessary. This concept would solve the traffic problem by "access by proximity" (s. Richard Register's "Ecocities - Rebuilding cities in balance with nature"), and in addition all the green would save energy and improve the inhabitants' quality of life considerably.
Also, aren't they tearing down old stuff in Asia all the time? People there are used to it... The existing structures of our "modern" cities are built for cars. If we want to live in cities for humans, starting from scratch is the most reasonable thing to do.
I was very happy to see that they might actually start to www.aumm.nl build a city like the proposed one, but if not even the ecogeek community is open for it then I guess there's no chance that mainstream people will ever accept it.
0
...
written by G, September 11, 2009
A city where people don't need road or rail? Think of what a huge difference that would make compared to the generic levitra way many cities are set up now! I'm in the U.S. and it's a country where you pretty much have to have a car to get around. If most of the world can drastically cut down on cars and transportation, there would be cleaner air. There would be much less extracting, processing, and burning of oil. Lower living expenses as people would spend less on fuel for transportation. Food and other things would be cheaper too because currently when fuel prices rise, food prices and cialis online store other things usually rise too! There would be less pollution. There may even be less wars! To build a new city that is us drugstore pharmacy viagra environmentally logical and sound seems like a good idea. If it truly works and is the best way for cities to be built, then this may serve as a model that others may eventually adopt. Otherwise when new developments are made (and they will be) they will just go by the same models that have been in use, which are dirty and contribute to pollution and burning of fuel and such. Saying not building anything new is greenest is not realistic. There is going to be new building and new development. If they are made correctly it will be much better than building them the way they've been!built!

Write comment

security code
Write the displayed characters


busy
 

Are you an EcoGeek?

We've got to keep 7 billion people happy without destroying our planet. It's the biggest challenge we've ever faced....but we're taking it on. Are you with us?




The Most Popular Articles