Nicholas Kristof’s recent editorial applauding the efforts of Portland, Oregon to cut carbon emissions — it has already reduced emissions below 1990 levels despite appreciable population and economic growth (per-capita emissions have dropped 13%) and is on track to exceed Kyoto targets — has reached #1 on the most e-mailed articles list.

What’s really notable is that the Portland strategy (of course) focuses on transportation and livability as strategies to build sustainability. Too many environmental critiques still take an engineer’s perspective and look for more efficient systems to save the day; a challenge as large as climate change could certainly use tinkering around the edges, as with more efficient street lights, but also requires rethinking much larger systems like private transport.

[O]fficials in Portland insist that the campaign to cut carbon emissions has entailed no significant economic price, and on the contrary has brought the city huge benefits: less tax money spent on energy, more convenient transportation, a greener city, and expertise in energy efficiency that is helping local businesses win contracts worldwide… Portland’s officials were able to curb carbon emissions only because the steps they took were intrinsically popular and cheap, serving other purposes like reducing traffic congestion or saving on electrical costs.