Green for go or gray for pollution?

If the infrastructure of national and international cities were able to manage great programs that can regulate the new and improved eco-friendly equipment, then the earth will be able to have a longer life span with less pollution. Having energy saving systems and future possibilities of creating eco-friendly buildings, can improve our economic status but also the sustainability of the ecosystem on a both national and international scale. Currently, we have programs and basic infrastructures that are built and used to the best of its ability for the people but not the overall beneficiary toward the earth. Many arguments are discussed about the infrastructures around the world that are not being regulated or, being properly managed. Many articles explain these issues at hand, but there are many examples today that show why we need to pay close attention to these infrastructural issues because of the effects it has or the assumed effects it could have in the future.
When any type of infrastructure begins in a third world to a first world country, there has to be some kind of power that regulates the plans of the infrastructure projects. One example is the Impact Program that is used in San Diego, California. This article, "Infrastructure Impact Program" by the city of San Diego, explains how they have been using the Impact Program since the year of 1993. The reason this program was created is stated as, "to minimize the negative impacts on small businesses due to large sale public improvements...etc" (Infrastructure Impact Program). The entire article explains the correlation of all businesses that has the need to press on toward any infrastructural plan to be some successful in the end. This article argues that the program is sufficient enough to have a good infrastructure in San Diego. Acknowledging the fact that having one type of program such as the ‘Impact Program’ that has lasted for more than two decades is beneficial, the question that then comes up is, “are the infrastructures being managed well?” Also, having one program may be great, but does this hold back any revolutionary ideas such as going green to create an eco-friendly smart city?
So, having structured programs are great, we are able to come up with one or two great programs where were able to keep any city in great shape when infrastructure comes to mind. But how are these so called programs/infrastructures and the cost of it being regulated or managed? Well, there are many problematic assumptions that having an outsourced infrastructure where separate countries and states help regulate some other cities infrastructure is bad. The article, “Outsourcing: The Pros and Cons of Offshore Remote Infrastructure Management,” by Stephanie Overby reports that a CIO named Bill Piatt, the head honcho, is outsourcing the infrastructure with different states and countries. Piatt states, “All infrastructures is managed remotely. No one’s ever sitting inside your data center anyway, even if it is in your basement. Admins are working from a different building or a different city or, if it’s a weekend, logging on from home. Remote infrastructure management is something that virtually every organization does every single day. But people somehow think there’s a material difference if that work is done offshore” (Overby). Piatt then begins to state that everything is becoming mainstream such as, “network services and help desk support to server maintenance and desktop management” (Overby) where the issues at hand are the companies that are in the business with this type of program has to pay “$80 billion to $120 billion” (Overby). Now since outsourcing the infrastructure is a go since the year of 2008, Stephanie states, “less than five percent of revenue from infrastructure outsourcing is derived from services delivered from an offshore location back into North America or Western Europe” (Overby). Having this in mind, other countries like India are one of the number one countries that is outsourcing there resources for infrastructure to the United States as well. Companies discuss this issue over and over but, a lot of them are paranoid, more or less to this fact, “While there are some labor cost savings to be reaped by off shoring infrastructure management tasks, the limited savings may not be worth it for some IT leaders. Others may be constrained by compliance requirements or political considerations. "CIOs have to step back and ask themselves what they're trying to accomplish with infrastructure outsourcing. Cost savings? Optimization? Transformation? Efficiency?” (Overby). Overall, the companies, states, and foreign countries obviously have mixed feelings to the fact that this would not be beneficial at all because of the thinnest ice that could fall in when outsourcing and in the end fright triumphs where many companies back off on the idea.
Albeit the programs are a bit problematic where moving on to a better infrastructural plan will be hard and having outsourced resources for our infrastructure is not easy, foreign countries are starting to catch on to the ‘Go Eco-friendly’ to another level. In the article, "Amsterdam: A Smart City Goes Live," by Mark Scott explains how the Dutch city is utilizing eco-friendly equipment to create a smart city. Scott reported that Amsterdam is one of the first cities to install these energy saving equipments, “The first of 1,200 household were gearing up to install an energy saving system that aimed at cutting electricity costs" (Scott). With a great change to decrease the pollution to the atmosphere Scott also reports that a company NUON stated “were in the right place at the right time". As Scott reports all of the good and great things about the eco friendly equipment, there are great examples of how countries today are contributing to the fact of pollution. One of the huge examples of polluted infrastructural cities is New York City. The contributed pollutants from transportation vehicles, public transit, factories, corporation buildings, and restaurants create a bigger influence of developing harming diseases which states here, “In 1985 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reported that toxic chemicals found in the air of almost every American home are three times more likely to cause some type of cancer than outdoor air pollutants” (Air Pollution Causes). Although New York City is one of the number one cities that create mass amounts of pollution because of their infrastructure, one international country such as China create huge amount of pollutants. China is mainly known for their factories that are used to create a lot of textiles and goods for the United States etc. Cities like these create a huge negative impulse on the earth’s geography and human existence. “The focus on cutting cities' emissions could have a big impact on the battle against global warming. As of 2006, more people now live in urban areas than in the countryside, and the sprawl surrounding megacities are most likely to increase” (Scott). Consulting firm Accenture (ACN) reckons cities produce almost two-thirds of total global carbon dioxide emissions through a combination of car fumes, household energy use, and industrial manufacturing” (Scott). As Scott stated, this will definitely help the mega cities to decrease the effect of global warming and at the same time he is getting great publicity towards the national and international public to adapt the same system.
Knowing that the effect of megacities to pollution is huge, we know that our back up plan, which is now our main plan, is to emulate the ideas of Amsterdam’s energy saving equipment. Though San Diego is a small city in California, there are many ways to improve the infrastructures so that we may go green to help the earth. Other cities are rated to how well the living is in each city and country from one to ten, “Vancouver, Vienna, Melbourne, Toronto, Perth, Calgary, Helsinki, Geneva, Sydney, and Zurich” (City Mayors). These cities that were stated have pointed out that Canada, and Australia is the biggest countries to have the best cities that produce less harmful pollutants in the air than the cities in Asia, and North America. So if we could in anyway emulate and enhance what San Diego’s infrastructure could be, then we can have a national and international adaptability of all the cities converting to a more eco-friendly environment. Reading this article showed me great examples of how different countries around the world are showcasing different ideas to create a green and healthier environment. But on the other hand, I think that a lot of the countries today are becoming arrogant and adamant of their own decisions to go for a change that’s for the better but are scared to make the decision to spend so much money on energy saving and less pollutant infrastructures.
We the people need to create a better way to develop a better regulation system to help manage the outsourcing of infrastructure so that we don’t waste money on useless things. We also need to manage how we are going to create and green environment so that we can internationally and nationally show the revolutionized infrastructure that were currently going towards. Though the outsourcing idea of infrastructure may seem complex, it might just help us create a breakthrough to saving our ecosystem because; much intelligence can be inputted into one thing to create an eco-friendly smart city. We can most definitely look at the infrastructures of the main countries like Canada and Australia and also look at Amsterdam’s equipment to help push San Diego’s city to the right starting point and reverse the cause of having high amounts of chemicals that are produced inside and outside of the downtown buildings. Also, emulating the idea of the discrepancies of the Dutch city Amsterdam going green equipment will definitely help us to start on the right track to start from small cities to megacities. Hopefully in the end help the economic status along with saving the human population and the earth as well.