Most Sustainable Cities
St. Louis isn’t at the top, but it’s also not at the bottom, ranking number 32 overall for most sustainable city, according to LawnStarter. The lawn tips and care company ranked 2021’s “Most Sustainable Cities” by comparing the 200 largest U.S. cities across 24 key sustainability indicators.
Among the factors compared were the number of incentives and policies supporting renewables and energy efficiency; the number of zero-energy buildings; the share of workers who use green commuting methods; and the prevalence of community-supported agriculture.
Check out the 10 cities leading (and lagging behind) sustainability efforts below, followed by some highlights and lowlights from the report:
Most Sustainable Cities
1) San Francisco, CA
2) Boston, MA
3) Sacramento, CA
4) Washington, DC
5) Baltimore, MD
6) Rochester, NY
7) San Diego, CA
8) Oakland, CA
9) Salt Lake City, UT
10) Seattle, WA
Least Sustainable Cities
191) Pasadena, TX
192) Hialeah, FL
193) Sunrise Manor, NV
194) Metairie, LA
195) Enterprise, NV
196) Port St. Lucie, FL
197) Cape Coral, FL
198) Peoria, AZ
199) Miramar, FL
200) Pembroke Pines, FL
California cruised its way to the top of Lawnstarter’s sustainability cities ranking. Four Golden State cities sit in the top 10, including San Francisco at No. 1, Sacramento at No. 3, San Diego at No. 7, followed by Oakland at No. 8.
In California, Lawnstarter credits the State with being first to propose banning sales of gas-powered cars, constructing America’s first high-speed rail line, and tackling a years-long drought problem by reimagining water management in a far more sustainable way. While other states are making incremental changes, California is implementing sweeping reforms.
Another trend in Lawnstarter’s study showed larger cities are often greener than smaller ones. The most populated city in the country — New York — ranks at a respectable No. 14, coming in first on transit score and the share of green commuters. Washington, D.C., ranks at the top of the transportation category and second in the food production category.
With population density comes increased efficiency, which can reduce waste and carbon footprints. But there’s a dark side to these metro areas: Despite their high scores in all other categories, the biggest cities tend to perform poorly on pollution metrics.
While some larger cities are far better than others — Boston’s pollution rank is 75, while New York’s is a dismal 192 — it’s clear that keeping tightly packed cities clean can be a real challenge.
Florida lands at the bottom of Lawnstarter’s sustainability ranking, with five of the 10 lowest-ranked cities all hailing from the Sunshine State. Infrastructure and transportation were the major challenges faced by Florida cities. Port St. Lucie is the worst city for transportation, while Hialeah is the worst city for infrastructure.
”Florida is being pulled down by a rapidly increasing population and an over-reliance on cars — though doing away with vehicle inspections and emissions testing hasn’t helped the state’s carbon footprint, either,” according to Lawnstarter. Fort Lauderdale sits at 159th place for greenhouse-gas emissions, while Orlando is even lower at No. 163.
The full ranking and analysis can be found here: https://www.lawnstarter.com/blog/studies/most-sustainable-cities/
