None of this stuff is new! There was a movement in the 1930's where everyone would live in villages, practise crafts and be self-sustaining. Total twaddle!
Al Gore rolls in in his excutive jet and into his 5 star hotel telling us to use less. The author of course is desperate to get on this band wagon as her and her green mates want the executive jet etc etc.
When Al and the author use less and by definition have less I will take notice. Until then I think they just want less for me so there is more for them and they can tell me what to do! No chance girls and boys!
I will vote against and petion all I can aginst this total fraud!

Which bit is the fraud? The fact that suburbia is one of the most energy intensive, bland, soul-less McMansion McLife ways to live ever invented?

Is it a fraud that people are alienated by 6 lane highways and cars, cars, and cars, and the fact that we work on one side of town, drive to another part of town for "fun", drive to another part of town to "shop" or have "groceries" or go to sports or church, but in reality these are all disconnected and unrelated events? Is it a fraud that isolation and depression has increased out in Sydney's western suburbs? (I used to work in welfare and have studied this stuff).

Face it, suburbia depends on the car. Peak oil is coming, and while I'm fairly optimistic that the MOST important services can still be supported, I'm also fairly convinced that society as a whole will have to live with less personal transport. And it's happening.

Village towns are basically infrastructure projects where people try to create "off the grid" villages that are more resilient to oil shocks, able to supply most needs from local goods & services & produce, and where people actually know each other.

And the best thing? People instinctively realise that there's something wrong with the modern world of driving from unconnected box to unconnected box to work then sleep. What if you could walk down the road, past your favourite coffee shop and bookstores and friends on the way to work?

See the video here, presented to the University of New South Wales.

15 minutes of inspiring video. You'll realise it is NOT about Al Gore telling you to use less, but what you can GAIN by living in a city plan that is "more European than European". I know many people that would JUMP at an opportunity to live like this, and it's not even an eco-village, but a mainstream development occuring somewhere south of Sydney.

http://villageforum.com/

One of the key articles is: Lenzen M, Dey C J and Foran B, Energy requirements of Sydney households, Ecological Economics, 49 (3), 375-399, 2004. Wealthy inner city households in Sydney have something like twice the energy consumption of outer-suburban households, on a per capita basis, even taking transport energy use into account. The larger households found in detached houses in the outer suburbs appear to require less energy per capita, due to increased sharing of resources. Domestic energy and petrol expenditure in the inner city of Sydney is less than half those in the outer suburbs on a per household basis, but comparable on a per capita basis. See also:
http://www.propertyoz.com.au/library/RDC_ACF_Greenhouse-Report.pdf

Hi OC,
it seems to me you're talking at cross purposes. The key seems to be the "wealth" of the inner city occupants, not the town plan. It's the consumerism of the wealthy inner city folk that's the problem, not the physical properties of the town infrastructure of stuff being closer together. As you admit, they use less *transport* energy.

However, maybe the outer suburbs are newer and have slightly better passive-solar thermal and insulation requirements than the older buildings in town? That's not a comment on Urbanism but on "bad" Urbanism and energy inefficient architecture.

Make sure you watch "Grand Designs" ABC 8:30 Tuesday night (tomorrow night) as they are doing the ULTIMATE passive solar & cheap materials, the Earthship.

Combined with "Village towns" or some other form of walking and cycling distance town plan, the Earth-ship makes great sense in that it enables off-grid living. Independent water and energy and sewerage treatment. Zero carbon. Check it out.

Transition towns advocate self reliance, so what happens to the sick, diabled and infirm. It seem a great cop out by Governments not to provide services...any services.

It's not so much a "cop out" but preparing just in case "normal civilisation" as we know it starts to fail. So that means everything from a Greater Depression with Hoovertowns through to Zimbabwe through to Mad Max.

Yes, if the government had money and was not providing normal health care and care for the elderly, yes that's a total cop out. But what if they're having trouble answering the phone and keeping the lights on?

The thinking is as basic as Scout's motto of "Be prepared". Society is far, far too dependent on liquid fuels and long distance transport of goods.

97% of goods are freighted around Australia by truck drivers dependent on diesel. Just how long could normal government budgets last if our fuel was cut by 50%? How would our economy be? What about 60%? What about 90%?

Peak oil is REAL and "more" local living seems inevitable, maybe even attractive? Imagine if, as the Village-Town concept above suggests, 80% of our local economy fed into itself and was immune from world economic fallout. Sounds good hey? Local food, local water, local electricity.... this can all be done economically with today's technology.

Watch "Grand Designs" at ABC1 8:30 tonight (Tuesday 14th July) for passive solar thermal heating in winter and cool insulation in summer. Tyres and old beer bottles, and you can build an attractive, "Hobbit" styled home. We can do this but it's going to take a lot of work.