Chris Graham
London's Eco Town

home  |

press  |

politics  |

environment  |

art  |

bibliography  |

 
Central Government Policy is to have 10 Eco Towns built around England. The positioning of these remains controversial. When the proposed was increased from 5 to 10 it is understood that there was to be one eco town in each housing regions with an additional one formed by the conversion of an existing settlement.
Whatever the Government's specification for their eco towns the essence of the concept is that an eco town would be a zero carbon development. It is questionable whether those politicians who are so ready to bandy the label of 'zero carbon' have any real understanding of what it means.
There have been communities that have operated in a zero carbon fashion since the beginning of human history. So called primitive societies were 'zero carbon' until they made any significant use of peat, coal, or oil deposits. Communities such as the Armish shun the use of such things from a philosophical standpoint that they have adopted for many years and arguably from a time when such practices were uncommon.
In the 1970s when issues of climate change received attention during the 'oil crisis' anyone setting out to live in a zero carbon fashion was labelled a hippy and a 'drop out'.
For any zero carbon development to be built and function in the 21st Century it either have to be self deficient or producing sufficient energy from renewable sources to fund any imports from elsewhere. Total isolation might make this possible but clearly it is intended that there will be compromises. Clearly the word zero is being used when reduced in meant.
Even with this reduced committment there are few places in England where carbon inputs could be seriously minimised.
What is needed is a large clear flat site with excellent existing water supplies and a variety of public transport near an existing connorbation.
Such a site would enable a 'walkable city' development to be built, a modern day version of Ebenezer Howard's 'garden city' to be built.
In London the optimum site would be that of the disused airport at Heathrow where the termini could serve initially as transport and shopping nodes at least whilst the town were underconstruction, maintaining both the number of jobs in the area and a return on the investment already made.
In 2006 May Tony Hall and Peter Hall published their report "Heathrow a Retirement Plan" setting out that Heathrow was past its use-by date and the case for a replacement airport to be sited on artificial island to be sited in the Thames Estuary.
Ken Livingstone was concerned about air travel and we can speculate as to how his policies would have developed concerning the existing London airports.
Boris Johnson has published "Planning for a Better London" in which he says:-
"To oppose the current plans for a third runway at Heathrow airport and to engage with London’s business, environmental and amenity organisations, neighbouring regions and other stakeholders in identifying other options to maintain and develop London’s global air links. The Mayor intends to lead a thorough review of long-term options for London’s airports, including the scope for a new airport in the Thames Estuary."
For more on Boris Johnson's proposal for a possible Thames Airport see Boris Island’ airport may replace Heathrow: The London mayor plans to shut down the city’s main airport and build a new four-runway hub in the Thames estuary.
"Commencing our descent to Boris Island in Cloud Cuckoo Land ..." in the Guardian on 2008 September 22nd.
For more on Eco Towns see the Town & Country Planning Association" on the subject and Communities & Local Government
Updated 2008 September 23rd