12 Cities Leading the Way in Sustainability

The federal government has been slow to enact meaningful reforms to combat climate change. Fortunately, some local legislators have stepped up and are leading the way. Here are twelve American cities with innovative sustainability initiatives.


(Credit: Cacophony/Wikimedia Commons)

Portland, OR

Portland heads most lists of America’s greenest cities. Mayor Sam Adams, whose term ended on Dec. 31, 2012, said in his first State of the City Address in 2009 that he hoped to make Portland the most sustainable city in the world. Over half of Portland’s energy comes from renewable sources. Adams worked to replace dirty energy suppliers with cleaner sources, and set up Clean Energy Works, a first-in-the-nation program that gives homeowners free energy assessments and provides $2,000 rebates and loans for home retrofitting. He also started a curbside composting program that has resulted in a 38 percent drop in the city’s trash output.

From the show

    BillMoyers.com encourages conversation and debate around issues, events and ideas related to content on Moyers & Company and the BillMoyers.com website.

    • The editorial staff reserves the right to take down comments it deems inappropriate.
    • Profanity, personal attacks, hate speech, off-topic posts, advertisements and spam will not be tolerated.
    • Do not intentionally make false or misleading statements, impersonate someone else, break the law, or condone or encourage unlawful activity.

    If your comments consistently or intentionally make this community a less civil and enjoyable place to be, you and your comments will be excluded from it.

    We need your help with this. If you feel a post is not in line with the comment policy, please flag it so that we can take a look. Comments and questions about our policy are welcome. Please send an email to feedback@billmoyers.com

    Find out more about BillMoyers.com's privacy policy and terms of service.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1469028057 Sally Peters

      Minneapolis recently expanded its recycling program. Also local businesses have taken steps to be greener, because it is a value of the area. My fav coffee shop has compostable cups, and a local grocery chain has compostable plastic bags.

    • Ace

      Austin has also banned plastic water bottles at city facilities and has vowed to go Zero Waste (…or darn close) by 2040 by diverting waste, reusable items, and compost from area landfills/incinerators. It’s the first policy of its kind in Texas.

    • Moeby

      Maybe I’m disoriented, but are you sure that’s a picture of the Minneapolis skyline?

    • Michael F

      No, it’s not Minneapolis. But, we here in fly over country are used to it.

    • SuzannaFromEugene

      I love how Eugene is the only city whose skyline is as much trees and hills as it is buildings. So beautiful!

    • http://www.facebook.com/leslie.mackenzie Leslie MacKenzie

      Urban agriculture should also be considered as part of a city’s sustainability. I’d like to see which cities are doing the most to encourage local food.

    • Anonymous

      It helps to have green cities, and nice clean air and all I don’t see how LA is on the list I am not far from it, (45 mins) and it is horrid. Bad roads, bad air congestion and no real good efficient methods of public transportation in one of the most populated areas of the country.

      Northern California, SF to Washington had the better looking cities, it seems those with natural running water by them seem to be best off for appeal. Most other cities look a lot better and seem to be taking the steps to progress into a new age.

      Our country though, overall is pretty behind in such advancements, you should do a global list of cities then see where we fall, it would be like I’d say that even one be put on the top 10.

    • Alan

      Oops. The picture in #4 of Minneapolis is clearly Charlotte North Carolina.

    • CarolfromAshland

      Ending the silence on Climate Change is absolutely critical, and I am glad some cities are taking the lead, not waiting for the federal government on this one.

    • http://twitter.com/GarethKane Gareth Kane

      That’s “10 US cities leading the way in sustainability”, I take it?

    • Doug From GR

      Just another example of why Grand Rapids continues to move quickly up the “recognized city” ladder…GR just gets it!

    • San Jose Cool Cities

      So many of these goals are in the Green Vision for San Jose, CA. I hope our City will step up and be one of the next greenest cities in the country.

    • Dusty Hinz

      What a fluff piece. Ever heard of the Jevon’s Paradox? I just think fluffy little pieces like this create the illusion that technology is going to save us. It is our entire way of life that is the problem. Modern, globalized, industrial civilization is killing the planet and is not sustainable. Infinite economic growth is not possible on a finite planet, yet our fractional reserve banking system that creates money out of thin air and loans it out at interest (and the logic of capital) NECESSITATE constant growth.

      I have been a big Moyers fan since I learned of the man in college, and I think he gets it so right so much of the time, but sadly, when it comes to the environment and our entire way of life — what I would consider THE issues of our time — he just doesn’t get it.

      These “renewable” sources of energy you speak of require an industrial mining system, an industrial transportation system, and industrial manufacturing. In other words, what is defined as “renewable energy” actually is dependent upon the fossil fuels industrial system. Many people, including Bill McKibben and James Howard Kunstler, say that no amount of renewables will ever be able to replace the incredible potency of fossil fuels…that we are living in the midst of the one-time fossil fuels lottery extravaganza, and watch out, because we are at Peak Oil.

      I am so sick of this buzzword “sustainability,” Moyers and Company, would you care to define what this even means? Bill, do you think multi-million person cities can exist until the of time? I don’t. Do you think 8 million people can just continue to live in New York City forever? Sure, they use less energy per capita, but this isn’t the point. Cities require the constant importation of resources. This means that constantly, resources from somewhere else are being transported into cities and consumed by people. Constantly, the land base is being degraded somewhere else so major metropolitan areas and mega cities can exist.

      And don’t forget that recycling itself is a heavy industrial process. These “zero waste” cities you seem to glorify will still require fossil fuels to operate.

      Let me cut to the chase: we are most certainly in a pickle. It is time for the establishment Left to stop only referring to “renewable” technologies when they speak of sustainability. The hard truth, that no politician will tell you, is that we need collective sacrifice and a shift in our paradigm of life. We need more people growing their own food and more communities getting most of what they need to survive from their given locality and region. Phoenix should be evacuated. WE NEED PERMACULTURE.

      Lastly, one idea I have: I think what this country may need to do, as a matter of survival, is have a mass exodus out of major cities and metropolitan areas to rural areas. We need to end the pesticide-ridden, land base-killing, mono-cropping industrial agriculture system. We need to literally give Monsanto the death penalty. Permaculture and organic farming techniques would be employed with the goal of people growing pretty much all what they need to survive. GDP would be discarded in favor of a new calculation, one I am still thinking about, but it would definitely attempt to calculate how much people are growing and producing themselves inside a given locality and region…necessities of life that are imported from thousands of miles away would result in a negative scoring.

      Bill, consider interviewing Derrick Jensen, James Howard Kunstler, Richard Heinberg, or John Bellamy Foster.

      Contact me or follow me on twitter @DustyHinz

    • ConorPF

      This plus ArtPrize is really making us stand out!

    • http://www.facebook.com/ThomastheBrave Thomas Price

      Why we Love it and have been a part of this for the last 15 years. http://www.facebook.com/SHEWorksWorldWide

    • The Rational Optimist

      @DustyHinz Someone should give you a soapbox, because you just laid down some serious truth that literally nobody in the world has ever said, ever. At the risk of sounding like I’m disagreeing with your well-researched ideas to save humanity, let me ask you some basic questions:

      If you had a family of 4, how many hours/day would need to be spent tending the garden/farm that provides your 2 children and wife/husband (I don’t pass judgement) 3 meals a day? How much fertile land is necessary for 300 million Americans to grow their own food? How will 80% (generously low estimate) of these Americans, who’ve never grown a single plant, learn to actually farm? What would we do if a summer like the one we’ve just had repeats itself, and none of my transplanted-from-(insert the big city you loathe the most) neighbors can get their (insert your favorite obscure veggie that nobody knows about) to grow? Can’t go to a regional/national grocery store, they all went out of business when Monsanto was beheaded and an ear of corn went up to $5.

      Is it worth regressing 100-200 years economically, just so we don’t have to worry about how a corporation is growing the food we eat? A corporation, mind you, that allows Americans to spend ~6% of their annual income on food, less than any other country in the world. The US may be full of fat people, but thanks to industrial agriculture, we can’t possibly eat all the food we produce. In turn, a country like Indonesia can buy some of it, where an average of 45% of income is spent on food. Imagine what the figure would be if we all followed your instructions and only grew what we ate. Which, not to mention, is an absurd contradiction. Anyone who rips agricultural corporations for hurting the average American farmer, yet claims people should leave cities en masse to grow their own food, has no concept of economics. In both instances, the average farmer is worse off. In fact, if everyone grew their own food, he’s out of a job completely. Although, no offense, that connection didn’t need to be made to see your lack of economics education (no, taking Econ 101 in college does not constitute an education in the subject). It became clear when you wrote the most incomprehensible stream of consciousness on economic growth. While I’d like to help you understand fractional banking, inflation, and the difference b/w real and nominal growth, let me direct you to two decent starting points: the library, and bloomberg.com. If you can make some connections between what you read in both places, you may be on to something.

      You absolutely NAILED the part about renewable resources being dependent on fossil fuels. It really is a bummer we can’t snap our fingers and have everything with a motor run on salt water (if only Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps were true!1!!1). Unfortunately, something that sounds so simple, like a complete overhaul of the planet’s energy system, is really quite complex when you think about it. You’re right about the world’s oil consumption being, and let me preface this with an apology for the word choice, unsustainable. It almost feels like we’ve been at peak oil since the 70′s!!! Because, ya know, people thought we were at peak oil… in the ’70′s. Most thought we hit peak oil in 2005, because oil extraction dropped off over the next few years. Yet shockingly, 2011 oil extraction topped that of ’05. I know, crazy right!? Of course, I’m not denying the notion that we’re running out of the stuff, that would be an unsustainable opinion. One day we’ll run out of oil… and I can no longer sustain that opinion. Luckily (for my selfish self), chances are my body will have ceased to sustain my life hundreds of years before that point, and I wouldn’t have to admit to being wrong. Even more lucky, there are people much smarter than you and I working day after day, year after year, trying to get us out of this “pickle”. I don’t know about you, but I’m confident our grandchildren will be driving (flying?) cars that run on something less harmful to the environment, and more abundant than oil. No, I don’t have a solution myself, but that’s because I’m not arrogant enough to believe I could solve the energy crisis after reading wikipedia pages for 2 hours.

      We’re fortunate to live in the time and place that we do. If you’d been born in the US 200 years ago, you wouldn’t be able to, say, go online and spout whatever bullsh!t pops into your head. Now, if you were born 20 years ago in one of the many third world countries that exist today, I’d be willing to bet that at the end of a long day of manual labor, earning anywhere from $.50 to $5, you’d be pretty f*ckin pissed off to hear some American claiming we’d all be better off if we quit our office job, moved to Iowa, and grew our own food. Because if that’s not the definition of “ungrateful”, I have zero clue what is.

      PS – You need to stop taking things so literally. It’s universally understood that “sustainable” is not defined as “100% recyclable”. It’s a step in the right direction as far as finding ways to reduce the usage rate of natural resources (I’m beginning to think I’m responding to a child). Though I doubt it will resonate with you, try to heed this advice. You should start forming your own opinions and stop interpreting the words of your idols as law. Yes, Master McKibben and King Kuntsler are wise beyond their years, there is no current renewable energy source as “potent as fossil fuels”. That alone should make it painfully obvious to you why the shift to renewables has been such a difficult transition, physically and psychologically. But to think that we’ve reached the plateau of “energy potency”… really!? You’re like every other alarmist who thought we were screwed. You know at one time, wood-burning was the highest source of energy used. It got to the point where people were nervous that we’d run out of trees completely. But eventually, people realized burning coal creates more energy, and everyone that was freaking out over the trees looked like total f*cking idiots. Also, I’ve read some of Derrick Jensen’s work, interesting ideas. Unfortunately for him (and in turn, you), not everyone thinks living an indigenous life is a life worth living. That’s what people with your mindset don’t understand (or can’t accept). People have different, fundamental beliefs about life. If you want to leave modern civilization, be my guest, I’m not gonna stop you. Just don’t act surprised when people look at you like you have 2 heads when you tell them to change everything about their life. Some people find meaning in life solving the problems they face, while others, like yourself, find meaning in avoiding them.

      PPS – Be careful, if the pesticide-ridden food you’re consuming doesn’t kill you, a heart attack from your pesticide anxiety will.

    • http://twitter.com/ScrewFoxNews Lee

      What really Jumps Off Page to Me, is all of these Cities are in Blue states “Smart People” except for Salt Lake. Red State people only want to Spend Money on #Welfare4Rich.

    • Confused Minneapolitan

      That’s not even a picture of Minneapolis…

    • brian

      pretty sure others have pointed it out, but that isn’t a picture of minneapolis. nice job.

    • http://www.facebook.com/leah.auckenthaler Leah Auckenthaler

      Minneapolis is doing a tremendous amount: http://www.minneapolismn.gov/sustainability/homegrown/index.htm Home Grown Minneapolis was an effort that started in the Mayor’s office, and his wife led it. They work with many of the local ag orgs. Also, that’s not our skyline!! :)

    • Peter

      The reason Minneapolis has so many miles of bikeways is because they are former train lines. It would be more sustainable to build a better public transportation system using those train lines for trains, which more people would use than bikes, thus cutting down on the number of cars on the road, and increasing sustainability. Bike paths are good and all, but denying public transportation to get more bike paths isn’t.

    • Anonymous

      All truly wise thoughts have been thoughts already
      thousands of times; but to make them truly ours, we must think them over
      again honestly, till they take root in our personal experience.

    • WILDBIRD41

      CHECK OUT THE NEW WIND POWER PROJECT –A PUBLIC-PRIVATE COLLABORATION–IN GLOUSTER, MA!

    • Are You Kidding Me?!

      NYC Philadelphia and Los Angeles DON’T deserve to be on this list for WANTING TO BE GREENER; ALL the other Cities have implemented and seen HUGE results! Encourage their participation by leaving them OFF the list until they accomplish said goals.

    • http://www.facebook.com/craigmarker Craig Marker

      Good to know that Seattle is number 3.

    • http://www.facebook.com/kristopher.heinekamp Kristopher Heinekamp

      Urban Agriculture has very strong support in the Upper Midwest; Milwaukee and Detroit being the leaders (from what I can see).
      I would also like to see more stories on that.

    • http://www.facebook.com/kristopher.heinekamp Kristopher Heinekamp

      While I agree with much of what you say, I think we should separate INHERENT problems from problems NOW inherent to OUR CURRENT system.

      You may want to take a trip out to some cities at the forefront of Urban agriculture. Places like Milwaukee and Detroit, left to die when Industry shuddered, are reclaiming the land and producing a LOT of local food. These are cities which have been abandoned by our society and left to fend for themselves….and fending they are!
      Must all cities be permanently evacuated? Not necessarily. (I CANNOT agree more about Phoenix, though! That city is a apocalyptic nightmare waiting to happen!)
      A centralized housing area WITHIN an agricultural area isn’t the worst thing, ever, inherently.
      I don’t think it’s cities, per se, that are the problem. Just because cities require outside inputs doesn’t necessarily make them unsustainable. If you can sustainably create surpluses of food, you can create the ability for people to work in non-agricultural roles. This has been true throughout human society (even before we farmed); we have religious/social figures (e.g. artists) who engaged in non-agricultural roles because the society valued their work.
      Once cities require MASSIVE quantities of energy to be shipped inwards, that becomes an issue.
      So, WITHIN OUR SYSTEM, cities are inherently flawed. But this does not make them unsustainable in the abstract sense.

      Is transportation inherently bad? It depends on where the energy to transport is from. If you think of the Sailing ships of the 17th Century (wood construction, hemp rope, and linen sails), they’re a fairly sustainable mode of transportation.

      Further, renewable energy can actually become sustainable.
      If we use the fossil fuel inputs to create a renewable infrastructure, any/all further energy inputs would be sustainable.
      It wouldn’t matter if we “spent” X gigawatts of energy recycling metals or glass to make more solar panels if that energy was already entirely from solar panels (or geothermal).
      Is this likely under the constraints of our current system? No. I’d agree that it is a slim chance.

      Again, I think the main thrust of your argument is spot-on. We (and the media) hide the influence and pervasiveness of fossil fuels because we do not want to address the shortcomings of our current system.
      Our entire lifestyle is predicated upon finite energies.
      For me, I’d like to see us use what fossil fuels we have left to create a more sustainable energy future.
      In that future, will America be able to consume 1/4 of the world’s energy? No.
      Does that mean we all need to be Luddites and technology must vanish? No.
      We would need to evaluate, socially, the things which our energy is most important for.
      This, of course, presupposes a vigorous, lively Democracy.

      I think, as a society, we need to evaluate our use of fossil fuels in a more critical way.
      Is it REALLY the best use of this finite resource to transport food which could be grown locally 2,000 miles away?
      Is it REALLY the best use for the future of the human race to use these resources to transport ourselves 20 miles in a steel cocoon weighing 8,000lbs?
      Or, is the best use of these resources to allow us to transition into the most energy-efficient, cost effective system we can create? A system which (of course) requires inputs of energy (e.g. the sun, wind, earth’s heat), but does not use more energy than it collects.

      I’d wager, with a sharp decline in mass consumption, and a strong re-evaluation of our priorities, Humanity COULD live sustainably simply reusing the metal we’ve already ripped from this planet.
      If we can survive long enough to transition the earth’s population into a smaller, less populous structure (like you find in developed nations), AND these people can keep their consumption at levels similar to those in less-industrialized nations, there is a glimmer of hope.
      Of course, Corporate Capitalism DEFINITELY won’t be the the system to lead us to THAT kind of a future.

    • http://twitter.com/seriouslyyouguy you guys

      Eugene’s skyline doesn’t look substantially different from Beaverton’s.

    • Joe

      What is your evidence that Philadelphia does not deserve to be on the list?

    • http://www.facebook.com/doblak1 Doug Oblak

      Like but don’t like the facts that a lot of the environmental action is continuing from the mayor(s) side of the table- but not the plutocrat Governor Herbert Hoover who takes pains to pull Utah backwards into the politically incorrect cowboy days. Maybe I need the rest of the story- but Herbert seems completely wrong for Utah!

    • Jane Carroll

      upto I looked at the receipt that said $9864, I be certain …that…my brother was actualey making money part time at their computer.. there aunt has done this 4 less than 13 months and just now paid for the morgage on there mini mansion and bought a new Chrysler. I went here, jump15.comCHECK IT OUT