Exurban Energy

4) “What this means is that Kunstler has the entire end of suburbia as we know it exactly wrong. Higher energy prices will spur new energy efficient construction and demand for less congested (more) freeways and erode support for the cenurbs as jobs move to where the people live not vice versa.”

TOLurker expands; "Certainly higher energy prices will force new construction to be more energy efficient. (I’m all for that). But aren’t high energy prices connected with recessions (in the short run) which will kill new construction? If people facing $5 gas demand less congested freeways, will they, hurting in this recession, vote the tax increases for new and additional freeways? Don’t more freeways eventually result in more kilometers driven, more cars and more congestion? What is energy efficient construction anyway—are you referring to the buildings? Or the layout of the cities? Because I think the latter is just as important in reducing energy use as the former."

Building NEW energy efficient is easy and justified. Retrofitting outmoded cenurbs is prohibitive and doesn't pay. The biggest POV energy thief is congestion. I see a new under the radar movement that understands this. A recession reduces congestion; a buffered system to some extent. In truth it just buys us some time to fix the problems.

I think you are incorrect as to urban development patterns on the old fashioned density intensity mixed use modal being energy efficient even with new construction materials and methods. I'd like to hear your thoughts however. Me, I see with one exception the cenurbs and exurbs being similar in gross energy consumption. The exception? NYC which "reports" some 30% lower energy consumption per person than any other US city. That's just too extreme to be anything other than a difference in reporting.