Five Lost Cities Of The Future

Detroit City has lost half it's population, but metro-Detroit is bigger than ever - don't forget that distinction.

The city of Detroit is in terrible condition mainly because of race issues and the flight to suburbia.

Ironically, as gas prices rise, if they can get the race/corruption issues out of the way, Detroit may rise again as suburbanites re-colonize the city. So I would put it in there as a city that will be re-born! Possibly with refugees from Vegas.

What about LA sinking into the sea?

Or how about

Every city will be lost in the future because nothing is permanent

Or perhaps you could consider things that could change that tide.

For example in detroit you could note that rising gas prices as well as youth getting over racism could increase the population in the city. Or maybe global warming which will make our weather more enjoyable to all of the people force out of atlanta.

Los Angeles, CA. Same reasons as Las Vegas and Atlanta.

LA pumps in water from the Colorado, two states away.
Talk of unsustainability.

Wow, I was aware that LA used the aqueduct, but had no idea that the source was in Colorado-- that definitely gets it a spot on the list. Consider hopefully-evolving Detroit to get the reprieve.
Then again, at least LA has a pipe to get it in-- Atlanta doesn't have that much.

I read something a while ago making this prediction about Perth, Australia which is subject to droughts that may be becoming more frequent.

I have doubts about Phoenix - my home city.

Sure we have pretty sweet water rights from the Colorado right now, but that might not last forever. Also, after another couple hundred years people will probably start asking why it makes sense to live in a geographically isolated area of the Sonoran desert where the usual summer temp is around 110 degrees. On the flip side, Phoenix is the perfect place to generate solar power so maybe that will be a future incentive.

It's not really pumped, per se. It comes from the Colorado river.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_River

Arizona Bay :D

Actually, the source of LA's water is not the state of Colorado, but the Colorado River, which forms its southeastern border with Arizona.

@earthsciencestudent

You are incorrect, the majority of the water supply in Los Angeles comes from the Central Valley/Sierra Nevada snowmelt. The Colorado river also provides water, but it comes from the river that runs along the California-Arizona border. The state of Colorado provides no water to the city of Los Angeles.

Cite: http://www.answers.com/topic/los-angeles-california?cat=travel

Uhh no... LA gets most of its water from Sierra Nevada mountain range that is 1/3 of California. I bet that it gets some Colorado river water but most of it is for Nevada and Arizona especially. Phoenix is in more danger of running out of water than LA.

Just my point of view. Feel free to criticize me.

Detroit City has lost half it’s population, but metro-Detroit is bigger than ever - don’t forget that distinction.
The city of Detroit is in terrible condition mainly because of race issues and the flight to suburbia.
Ironically, as gas prices rise, if they can get the race/corruption issues out of the way, Detroit may rise again as suburbanites re-colonize the city. So I would put it in there as a city that will be re-born! Possibly with refugees from Vegas.

Agreed. Economically, the city of Detroit is in a dire straits, but it's well situated geographically. If the sea levels rise, Miami and New Orleans are screwed. Las Vegas is counting its days, and is probably a fairly good canary-in-the-cave for the rest of the West that relies on the Colorado River. Detroit needs help, but it won't face the water shortages of the west and south or rising sea levels. Detroit's economic canvas is probably being wiped clean, and I think regrowth within the city will come eventually.

I live in Yooungstown, a rust belt city that is actually taking steps to plan how to best become a ghost town so it can start over.

Check out this article from CnnMoney from just last week:

All these cities will be lost in time, like tears in the rain. Time to die.

buffalo, ny does not have a drought nor inundation problem. from wikipedia "Buffalo and the surrounding area were long involved in railroad commerce, steel manufacture, automobile production, Great Lakes shipping and grain storage. Most of these industries have left the city through the years."

Los Angeles water supplies come from 3 sources. About half comes from the Eastern side of the Sierra, another 40% comes, in varying amounts, from the Western side of the Sierra (with which the city competes with Central Valley farmers and Delta smelt) and from the Colorado, and about 10% is local.

Still probably not sustainable, since there is evidence that all three sources have simultaneously experienced 500 year droughts in the past.

providing enough water is always a challenge, but I don't see how that would cause a city to cease to exist, only that the price of water there would go up and perhaps incentivise some people to move away, but not all because then demand would drop back again.

As for the oceans rising, they've been rising at a rate of 20cm a century for thousands of years now, and yet it's never been a giant issue for any city. Even Venice has its problems because it drains the water table beneath it, not because the oceans are rising dramatically. Compound that with the fact that Antarctica's ice mass is growing, where 90% of the world's land ice resides, and rising oceans really becomes a near non-issue.

LA gets >some ofRiver<. The river runs right along the California-Arizona border. But it is just one source for LA, the other major ones are the Owens Valley aqueduct (mostly just for LA city proper) and the California State aqueduct that comes from all over the state, and services the central valley and all of southern California. And LA also gets a decent amount from local ground water. Las Vegas and Phoenix are FAR more reliant on the Colorado River than LA. Heck, until just the last couple of years, San Diego was more reliant on the Colorado River than LA.

If either the Colorado or the Owens Valley aqueducts were shut off, LA would survive. It might hurt (especially in a drought), but it would not be a death blow. Las Vegas, Phoenix, and probably Palm Springs would be in deep doo-doo if they lost the Colorado. Not to mention the agriculture in the Coachella Valley.

BTW, Las Vegas is building pipelines to northern Nevada to get a new water feed.

Phoenix and Tucson are likely to be in big trouble as water supplies dry up and conditions get hotter. I lived in Phoenix, and it's a totally car-based city. Where I could see Detroit recovering as the downtown core is revitalized, I can't see that happening in Phoenix. 3 million people in the desert, where all water comes from far away. On the bright side, they certainly have the means to create unlimited solar power....

Well, LA always has the Pacific to desalinate. Not economically efficient, but technology will probably cure that.

Memphis/St. Louis if the New Madrid fault ever goes. Though it may be rebuilt since it wouldn't be a recurring problem. Same could be said for San Francisco, LA, or Portland if you ever see an 8.5+ magnitude earthquake out there.

Edit..
The first line of that last post should say...
LA gets >some ofRiver<.

The source is the Colorado *River* - not Colorado the state. The rive actually runs along the California border with Arizona.

earthsciencestudent and Ben,

please go look at a map. the Colorado river forms the border between California and Arizona. You may also want to go check out Mulholland and his Los Angeles Aqueduct. Yea, that guy really f'd over what was once the beautiful and lush Owen's valley.

Atlanta would be fine if they didn't have to release all their water for Florida and Alabama. Lake Lanier gets a small percentage from the runoff of the basin it is located in, yet provides the majority of water storage for cities and downstream. If the drought continues, more reservoirs will probably be built. But it probably won't. The only difference in a rainy vs non rainy year for Atlanta is whether or not a hurricane or tropical depression comes through. One storm dropping 10 - 15 inches of rain last fall would have filled everything back up. It's been a few years now since we had one, so hopefully we get one this year. It's funny to blame it on global warming though. Last year the media said there would be tons of hurricanes due to global warming. There weren't, and when we didn't get enough rain, that was blamed on global warming.

If you're going to talk about cities on the Colorado, you may as well include Phoenix on the list.

In the case of LA, it may take the idea San Diego is using and start on Desalinization. If thats the case, it may not fall off quite so soon.

What about that huge earthquake that is supposed to hit San Fransisco any day now? The last time they got hit by an earthquake (in the 20's), half the city was destroyed by the resulting fire.

San Francisco? The big one is due by 2010 (my money's on April 19 2009 in the office pool)

Almost all modern cities will not exist in the future, (without mankind to keep them from breaking down). The materials that most buildings are constructed from break down quite quickly. After a few hundred years, only buildings made of stone/brick/etc. will still be standing, the rest having crumbled to dust.

Great idea for a post!
The points about L.A. are right on plus a recent geological survey concluded that there is a 99% chance of a catastrophic earthquake in California in the next thirty years and L.A. is the most likely place for it.

I don't know about Atlanta. It is one of the fastest growing cities for a reason. It developed as a hub between all the smaller cities of the South. As long as those Southern cities still exist Atlanta will not become a ghost town. They do have a river, at least.

Much of Florida would already be under water if they weren't dragging sand out of the ocean and dumping it on the shore.
This is fun to think about. I imagine some of the cities in Texas and Arizona that aren't near water. They're already having sever drought.

Oops! Sorry about the bold. I was going for paragraph breaks.

I understand that you are merely writing what you know but you should consider maybe adding the word "American" to the headline here as it comes off a little ethnocentric.

Not so much a city, but my home Cape Cod is always in danger of being demolished through rising sea levels, hurricanes, and erosion, particularly us people out at the end.

NYC: It wouldn't take long for NYC to fall apart in the absence of electricity. It relies on pumps for removing water from the subway system, pumps for purifying water and lifting water for sanitation above the 3rd floor in any building.

The sanitation problem would be so great that after a week, people would flee.

Las Vegas is already looking more and more like Barter Town. I just hope Master Blaster lets me keep my job tending pigs.

What about the aspect of the MILLIONS of invading illegal aliens bringing with them a cultural capable only of creating the cesspool that is Mexico?

The barbarians are not assimilating. Their 2nd-world at best culture will alter any area where their horde of fast-breeding people settle, altering that area into a facsimile of what they left behind.

Cultural devestation can be quicker than environmental disaster.

Lubbock texas. It is practically a wasteland already

Surely somewhere like LA would start to invest really heavily in desalination plants if the water problem continues to get worse (and it will).
There has to be a point there where the cost/benefit of massive desalination plants from the ocean are used to supply coastal cities.
Not a cheap option (although the technology keeps improving), but neither is abandoning a city.

Of course, when California has the big earthquake that everyone is waiting for, the whole question will be moot, because LA will be totally underwater anyway.

Vegas? Soon to be a lost city?

NOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Every city will be lost in the future because nothing is permanent"

Like Jerusalem, and Beirut and Athens...

"5 Lost cities of the future - In the US" it should have been written! what about cities in other parts of the world? Osaka-Kobe, Tokyo, Amsterdam (Netherlands), Rotterdam (Netherlands),Dhaka (Bangladesh), Guangzhou (China), Ho Chi Minh City (Vietnam), Shanghai (China), Bangkok (Thailand), Rangoon (Myanmar) and Hai Phong (Vietnam)? (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22099668/)

Re: Ben:
---
Wow, I was aware that LA used the aqueduct, but had no idea that the source was in Colorado– that definitely gets it a spot on the list. Consider hopefully-evolving Detroit to get the reprieve.
---

Not Colorado. *The* Colorado, as in the river that separates California and Arizona. Piping water from this distance is bad enough, piping it from the state of Colorado would be absurd.

thankfully the rest of the world cities will survive.... I'm so moving to Venice now.

I live in Atlanta and there's no question it's at the breaking point.

The metro population is projected to double by 2017 and there is no way in hell the Chattahoochee river -- or Atlanta's physical infrastructure, with commuters facing 2 hour a day commutes -- can support that.

The pictures of Lake Powell and Lake Mead, the water sources for the whole Southwest and Las Vegas, respectively, are pretty staggering. Water levels are so low that some estimates say a 10 year wet period would be needed to restore them; which is about as likely as turning a fistful of dollars into a fortune in Vegas.

Speaking of pictures -- I am interested in how you are doing image resizing. Are you using a script/plugin, or resizing by hand, or is there a flickr size that happens to fit your blog so nicely?

Jeremy

LA gets much of its water from the Colorado RIVER, which borders CA and AZ. Although not two states away, it's still a problem.

You forgot Phoenix AZ. A colossal ruin waiting to happen. Much worse drought than Las Vegas and it's growing by leaps and bounds. There's gonna be a trainwreck within the next few years, and the crash will be spectacular. If global warming continues, expect Phoenix to become a ghost town within another 15 years.

The comment about Los Angeles is also dead on. Not only the water situation, but when gas prices punch up through $4 per gallon later this year and hit $10 per gallon within the next 5 years, you'll see how unsustainable this city really is. Burning $50 worth of gasoline just to go shopping for $70 worth of groceries is the very definition of "unsustainable."

Phoenix and HelL.A. compete for the same water with Califronia's central valley -- all from the Colorado River. Trouble is, CA's central valley generates 30% of the state's income because of the farming. Both Phoenix and HelL.A. are going to have to depopulate over the next 20 years. In fact, the entire Southwestern part of the United States will have to depopulate as we head toward $1000-a-barrel oil and global warming desertification.

Hm, glad I'm on the other side of the pond - sounds like the US is headed for doom time!

All this talk of sustainability ignores the one major cause of unsustainability: government. What is the cause of the ruin of Detroit and Buffalo? Government. What is causing the water supply problems in the south? Government. Who ran the levies that protected New Orleans? Government. What is the cause of the boom in environmentally deadly places like Las Vegas, Pheonix and Dubai? Freedom from government.

Sustainability is first of all a government issue: get rid of it.

I can't belive this.... I'M CRYING......................

You people are fools. If vegas and LA run low on water we'll switch to nuclear powered desalination. LA will export water to vegas if necessary.

death to oil www.oiljihad.org

Here's one. Chicago and most of northern illinois. Most people dont know that the great lakes especially Lake Michigan were created by enormous glaciers. When they melted and dispersed it took a huge amount of weight off of the crust beneath it. Slowly but surely the crust is rebounding in a process referred to as Isostasy. Its pushing down on a pool toy, when the pressure is taken off it shoots back up. But this all happens on the geologic time scale. So it rises a few centimeters a year. The prediction is that this will cause cities like Chicago to become flooded.

Vegas' drought is getting bad, and some of us are dumb enough to stay. The water district just pushed through an increase in monthly charges, which in my case means my monthly usage is going from $17 to $20. When you have two trees and a half dozen shrubs, low flow toilets, and efficient appliances, you really can get by. Community parks are popular, and the grasses that are sold down here are drought resistant strains. Hey, at least I don't have to mow a lawn. But, the reliance on Lake Mead is being looked at in the way of building a water pipeline from northern Nevada down to the Vegas area. The Southern Nevada Water District has been buying ranch properties up north at above market value...each property includes all water rights...so within 10 years, the valley could be importing water from another source. Oh sure, we'll have expensive as hell water, but one little upside is that the water that comes from up north might not be tainted with exotic fuels and other shit that's in Lake Mead.