A QUESTION OF MAGNITUDE: URBAN FORM AND ENERGY

HARRY MARGALIT
Faculty of the Built Environment
The University of New South Wales
Sydney NSW 2052
h.margalit@unsw.edu.au

Citation: Margalit, H., ‘A Question of Magnitude: Energy Density and Urban Form ’, Sustainable theory/
theorizing sustainability: Proceedings from the 5th International Conference of the Association of Architecture
Schools of Australasia, Victoria University, New Zealand, 4-5 September 2009.

Abstract
This paper sketches out some relationships between urban form and energy. Using current
models of urban consolidation and their purported efficiency of energy use, the paper attempts
to establish some relationship between energy policy and urban form, drawing heavily from the
work of Vaclav Smil in the field of energy use and futures. The paper outlines the orders of
magnitude of urban energy requirements, and their necessary infrastructure, as a counter to
idealist notions which in many cases fail to grasp the energy budget that sustains contemporary
urban life. This in turn can lead to a severe underestimation of the consequences of alternative
energy policies, and the profound changes they would bring to urban form through their
infrastructure and distribution requirements.
Keywords: Energy Policy, Urban Form, Energy Density.

1 Introduction
This paper is based on observations drawn from Sydney, as my home city. In this respect the
subject is a capitalist city, built on colonial foundations which have transformed with the
technological, political, social and legal changes Sydney has witnessed since its founding more
than 2 centuries ago. While these may be truisms, it seems important to reiterate some
historical dimensions as they are key to describing both what Sydney is, and what it may
become. Within the limits of this paper the intention is to sketch out certain conditions that
appear to define many aspects of urban life, and to suggest how these are linked to energy use
and requirements. Alterations to how energy is harnessed, transported and used must then
have an effect on urban life, and certain observations on this linkage will be made.

2 Energy and the Modern City

Any understanding of energy supply and use in contemporary Sydney needs to acknowledge
the market dynamics which determine the spread and mix of energy sources. Like many cities
of similar size and dynamism, Sydney’s growth has been fueled by various energy sources as
they became available through extraction, generation and distribution networks (Frost and
th
Dingle 22-31). The 19 century mainstays of animal power and biomass fuels gave way to
alternate sources harnessing fossil fuels, and the permutations we now have of coal-fired
generation, domestic and industrial gas use, and liquid refined fuels such as petrol and diesel
(ABARE, “Energy” 40,41). At the risk of stating the obvious, growth of energy use per capita is
th
one of the key indicators of economic development through the 20 century (EIA). Vaclav Smil
charts this transition in very simple terms. Calculating the oil equivalent of available energy per
capita world wide from 1700-1900, he notes that the per capita availability of useful energy was
12 times greater in 1990 than in 1850 (Smil “World History” 187). These figures are even more
significant in agricultural production, with an increase in average energy inputs per cultivated
hectare increasing by a factor of eighty. These figures drive home, in crude terms, the
contribution of contemporary fuel sources, mainly fossil, in sustaining contemporary life. The
magnitude is not in dispute: similar growth figures can be found in alternate histories of energy
(Kruger 4). However Smil is unique in the range of calculations he provides for energy
generation and usage per unit area.
Using his figures, we can see that changing energy usage has had an equally profound effect
on urban agglomerations. According to Smil
Traditional (solar) societies could support only a small number of large cities because
the relatively high power densities of urban food and fuel consumption had to be
supplied by harvesting biomass energy from large surrounding areas…at least 40
times, and commonly about 100 times, larger than the settlement itself (Smil, “World
History” 208).
In summary, Smil states that
traditional cities had to be supported by the concentration of diffuse energy flows, but
fossil-fueled cities are supplied by the diffusion of concentrated energies…The
coalfields and oilfields that supply fossil-fueled cities may occupy an area equal to no
more than 10 percent and as little as one-tenth of 1 percent of their built-up areas (Smil,
“World History” 208).
This observation sets up an important principle underpinning differing forms of urban
development – the differing energy densities that attend urban form. As in much of Smil’s work,
the correlations he draws between energy indicators and levels of development do not always
elucidate the mechanisms of connection, but they do raise important theoretical issues. The
prevalence of concentrated energy in contemporary cities such as Sydney appear to allow a
number of forms of development because the consequences of large concentrated populations
can be dealt with through energy-intensive solutions. In broad terms this seems to transcend the
specifics of suburban versus denser forms of development – greater Sydney could not exist in
either form without concentrated energy inputs for transportation or services.
As a general rule, Smil calculates the power consumption of modern cities as ranging from 15 to
2
150 W/m of total area, with the highest figures for cold-climate cities with heavy industry. One
could crudely calculate the figure for greater Sydney, using the annual energy consumption of
2
NSW (1,531 PJ) and its proportion of the NSW population (56%) and area (1771 km )(Cuevas-
2
Cubria and Riwoe 26; ABS “Sydney Atlas” 12). This yields a figure of 1.327 MJ/m of urban
2
area, equivalent to some 20 W/m . To put this in context, Smil rates the sustainable yield from
2
biomass fuels, mainly wood, at a maximum of 1 W/m , but perhaps as little as one-tenth of that.
2
He also rates the energy consumption of pre-industrial towns between 5 and 30 W/m , but
2
predicated on a density of some 20,000 persons per km , or about ten times the overall density
of a city like Sydney (Smil, “World History” 220,221; ABS “Sydney Atlas” 12).
Although these are crude measures, they illustrate the intensity of energy use in a modern
society. Average per capita energy consumption in NSW in 2004/2005 was 217 GJ – the figure
is considerably higher in WA and the Northern Territory (Cuevas-Cubria and Riwoe 27). It is
worth noting here the sources of energy in Australia as a whole, and its consumption by sector:
 Primary Energy Consumption Australia 2004/5, By Source

6000

5000

4000
PJ/a

3000

2000

1000

0
black coal brown coal oil natural gas renewables total
Source

Figure 1. Primary Energy Consumption Australia 2004/5, By Source

Source: Redrawn from Cuevas-Cubria and Riwoe Table 8.

Primary Energy Consumption Australia, 2004/5, By Sector

6000
total

5000
electricity generation

4000
manufacturing and construction

transport and storage

PJ/a

3000
petroleum refining (exclude)

commercial and services

2000
residential
agriculture

1000
mining

other

0
Sector

Figure 2. Primary Energy Consumption Australia, 2004/5, By Sector

Source: Redrawn from Cuevas-Cubria and Riwoe Table10.

In urban terms, we can see that the distribution and harnessing of these energy sources are not
even, and modern cities use particular modes and locations of energy sources. Power
generation, for example, has moved from a localised system dispersed through the city to
centralised, large scale remote generation located at the energy source. Sydney’s major
electricity sources (excluding the Snowy Mountains Scheme) are located in the Hunter Valley,
the Central Coast and west of the Great Dividing Range, and generally sit close to their coal
sources. The largest of these – Bayswater, Eraring, Liddell, Mt Piper, Vales Point B and
Wallerawang C – have a combined capacity of 10,920 MW, or some 277 PJ per annum at 80%
capacity, all generated from coal (NSW Parliament). What is significant in physical terms is the
relatively small area these power stations and their attendant mines occupy, which is a fraction
of the urban area they serve. This demonstrates, in physical terms, the concept of energy
density that is the hallmark of fossil fuels. In biofuel terms, using Smil’s highest figure of
2 2
sustainable wood yield of 1 W/m , an area of 10,920 km of forest would be needed to sustain
this energy equivalent, without taking into account the energy costs of extraction and transport.
This is over six times the area of Sydney, and in crude terms would only meet a fraction of the
over 850 PJ that Sydney consumes in all energy forms per annum.
The issue of energy density is particularly important when evaluating alternate sources of
energy. The concentration of energy in fossil fuels means not only compact sources, but also
efficient forms of energy transportation. Again, if we consider electricity generation, the areas
required for alternate means of generation reflect their relative low yields per unit area.
According to Smil, the rates for geothermal, high-head hydro and wind vary between 5 and 15
2
W/m . The current largest wind farm in the world, at Horse Hollow in Texas, is rated at 735 MW
2 2 2
generating capacity and covers some 190 km , equivalent to about 3.86 W/m or 1.55 W/m
when one applies a generous capacity factor of 40% (AllBusiness). Current solar can be higher
2 2
– a typical 1kW unit occupies about 8m , or a power production density of 125 W/m at
2
maximum output, but clearly considerably less (25 W/m ) over the daily cycle with an upper
capacity factor of 20% (Sharp Corporation; RERL 1). The equivalent figure for a NSW power
2
station would be about 2 kW/m (capacity factor of up to 90%) even if the distribution network is
included (Smil, “Nature” 311-312). Another way of calculating the proportion of developed land
used by energy infrastructure follows Elvidge, who used impervious surface area (ISA) as a
proxy for the area where energy is consumed. Elvidge derived a ratio of energy infrastructure to
ISA of about 1:5 in the US: for countries with lower per-capita energy use Smil estimates energy
infrastructure at around 10-20% of ISA (Smil “Nature” 312).

3 Transport
All renewables operate at energy intensities at best one order of magnitude lower than fossil
fuels, and two orders of magnitude in some cases. In simple terms this means much larger
areas devoted to generation of electricity, for example, for cities of Sydney’s size. But electrical
generation is only one part of the energy budget. Daily average household electricity
consumption is in the region of 37 kWh, with peak consumption of perhaps 15 kW
(EES/DEWHA 29; Kemp). Yet a household with 2 cars may have available a further 200 kW of
motive power for transport, a figure which dwarfs the demands of the household itself. The
convenience of fossil fuels in this regard are their relative ease of storage and transportation,
and their high energy content – in the case of regular petrol, 46 GJ/ton (ABARE “Energy” 80).
The potency of this fuel has allowed the modern city to emerge, with its intense distribution
pattern sustained by the car, light utility vehicle and van.
 Australian Road Fuel Consumption by Type of Vehicle, 2005-06

Buses 2.1%
Motorcycles 0.3% Rigid trucks 8.2%
Light commercial vehicles
15.6%

Other trucks 0.2%

Articulated trucks 12.6%

Passenger vehicles 61%

Figure 3. Australian Road Fuel Consumption by Type of Vehicle, 2005-06

Source: Redrawn from ABARE, “Energy” 70.

Contemporary urban life is still sustained by physical interaction, despite the growth in
communication technology. The consumption of road fuel continues to rise, with the amount of
trips and kilometres travelled growing faster than the population (NSW “Metropolitan”). The
diversity of private vehicle usage shows the role it plays in the economic life of the owner:

Average Weekday Trip Purpose, Sydney, 2002

Other
3% Personal business
8%
Education/child care
Social/recreation
8%
23%

Work related business

10%

Commuting
Serve passenger 15%
17%

Shopping
16%

Figure 4. Average Weekday Trip Purpose, Sydney, 2002

Source: Redrawn from NSW “Metropolitan”.

The point here is that contemporary urban form is not simply determined by technology – rather
it creates a series of choices which become more or less attractive (Brindle 45-47). Like energy
policy generally, the energy consumed in transport in a modern city underpins the development
of choice within a market framework. The matrix of choice it sustains is now the baseline for
contemporary life – generational identity could arguably be linked to these norms of mobility.
This relationship, obvious but often overlooked in planning terms, has very deep implications for
any understanding of the effects of reduced energy consumption. Australian Treasury modelling
of CO2 mitigation measures, for example, concludes that various CO2 reduction scenarios will
not unduly affect economic growth, but the underlying technical assumptions are largely
untested. Treasury assumes that
Significant mitigation occurs from the electricity sector in all scenarios. By 2050, global
electricity sector emissions are 75-85 per cent lower than the reference
scenario…Global electricity emission reductions are due to the decarbonisation of
electricity supply through use of low and zero emission energy sources, and carbon
capture and storage...The uptake of more advanced vehicle technologies is more
pronounced in the CPRS -15 scenario, with hydrogen and electric vehicles comprising
10 per cent of road transport, compared with the CPRS -5 scenario of around
5 per cent… In the Garnaut -25 scenario, hydrogen and electric vehicles comprise
almost 45 per cent of total road transport by 2050 (Treasury).
The issue of energy intensivity is not dealt with, and the reliance on hydrogen and electric cars
begs the question of how these energy sources are generated in the first place. Hydrogen
consumes more energy in its production than it releases in use: 192-252 MJ/kg is consumed in
electrolysis, and it yields about 142 MJ/kg (Smil “Nature” 395 and EnergyToday). As we have
seen, no amount of idealism can substitute the low energy intensivity of renewables for that of
fossil fuels.
One of the reasons that Treasury has argued that the economic cost of moving away from CO2
emitting energy sources is low, rests in the tendency of energy to be used more efficiently over
time without any additional coercion. The energy efficiency of Australian vehicles and production
has been rising consistently, evidenced by a slowing in the growth of energy requirements and
falling energy costs per unit of GDP (Cuevas-Cubria and Riwoe 14). But these trends appear to
be fairly inelastic – the consequences of forcing efficiency through taxation is unknown, and
may prove ineffective due to limits on how quickly technology can produce viable innovation.

4 Conclusions
The belief that it is possible to move to alternate energy sources, or sources that emit little or no
CO2, without significant consequences rests on a technological idealism that seems largely
untested. The advantages of fossil fuels – their energy density, and the relatively low cost of
their extraction and transportation to date, as well as the significant energy return they deliver
after extraction, processing and transportation – need to be grasped in any meaningful debate.
This is not to say that the issue of energy and urban form is determinist, but the energy budgets
of modern cities clearly correlate to possible form. A shift to renewable energy sources would
have to accept a changed ratio of area given over to supplying primary energy needs.
This can be illustrated through a consideration of several Sydney local government areas,
chosen because they are relatively homogenous in form, without large areas of bushland within
their boundaries. The following table lists the areas with their relative densities, income, area
and annual greenhouse gas (GHG) equivalent per capita in tons:
LG Area Density Area GHG Average Taxable
2 2
persons/km km tons/pp Income
North Sydney 5943 10.5 30.62 $ 81,158.00
Mosman 3228 8.7 27.75 $ 119,571.00
Waverley 6944 9.2 27.03 $ 67,962.00
Leichhardt 4846 10.5 25.35 $ 69,849.00
Ryde 2503 40.5 22.29 $ 50,182.00
Holroyd 2311 40.3 18.39 $ 40,109.00

Table 1. Comparison of Local Government Areas

Source: ACF Consumption Atlas and ABS Regional Profiles

The above table illustrates a general point clear in the work of Dey et al., from which the GHG
figures are derived – even when transport is factored in, high GHG emissions do not necessarily
correlate to low density development, contrary to the conclusion of studies which are primarily
concerned with transport (Newman and Kenworthy). The NSW average of GHG emissions per
capita is 19.31: North Sydney, with its central location but predominance of flats and high
density compared to the rest of Sydney, has the highest figure. Mosman, with high incomes and
2
a density above Sydney’s average (2058 persons/km ), ranks second on the table for GHG
emissions. Waverley, with the highest density, ranks third, and modest but suburban Holroyd is
below the state average. In general, if we take GHG emissions per capita as a proxy for energy
consumption, then it appears that it correlates most strongly to wealth, inner city living and small
households (ACF). Thus the form of traditional suburbia is not inherently a greater consumer of
energy, even when its car reliance is taken into account.
If our energy needs in the future are to be met through renewable sources to any extent, then
the area required for their generation must of necessity be greater than is the case currently.
Urban consolidation would seem to increase our dependence on centralized energy supply
rather than diverse sources, because it entrenches a density of energy consumption with a
smaller footprint, and hence less opportunity for the harvesting of solar or biomass energy on or
adjacent to dwellings. If we really are facing a future of carefully interwoven fuel usage and
perhaps localized food production, can we afford to commit to an urban form that reduces the
possibility of this happening within the household? Is it wise to trade a quarter acre (or an
eighth), and its potential, for an apartment with no significant external area?
This can be illustrated through a consideration of Waverley, as it represents the densest LG
2
area apart from the city centre. With 22,807 households in an area of 9.2 km , its density is
almost 3.5 times the Sydney average (ABS “Profiles”). Average domestic household energy
consumption in Australia is 48 GJ per annum for cooking, heating/cooling and appliances, which
equates to about 37 kWh per day of electrical consumption (EES/DEWHA 29). At a capacity
2
factor of 20%, this would require PV solar panels of 7.71 kW capacity, or about 62 m of solar
panels. In the case of Waverley, the municipality would need 1.414 square kilometres of solar
panels to meet its domestic needs alone. In a block of units with 4 per floor and 6 storeys high,
2
the requirement would be 1,488 m of panels, which would likely exceed the total site area.
The above relates only to domestic consumption, and is dwarfed by the total per capita energy
consumption in NSW, which averages 217 GJ per person per annum. To meet this would
2
require 275 m of solar panel for each of Waverley’s 64,190 inhabitants, or 17.9 square
kilometres, an area greater than the total municipality.
Clearly this precludes any scenario where energy can be generated locally using photovoltaics,
2
assuming the logistics of arrays of this size could be overcome. Wind power, at about 1.5 W/m ,
would require nearly 300 square kilometres to meet all the energy needs of Waverley’s
inhabitants at current levels.
Following from this, one might ask what is the scope for reducing energy demand in broad
terms? This question has been addressed by Smil through a consideration of per capita energy
consumption through history. Acutely aware of how unreliable predictions in the energy field
have proven, Smil simply graphs average per capita energy consumption against Quality of Life
indicators. The NSW average of 217 GJ per person per annum is clearly towards the high end,
and is also associated with a high rating on the UN’s Human Development Index, a combination
of life expectancy at birth, adult literacy, combined educational enrolment and per capita GDP
(Smil, “Nature” 346-348). Smil estimates that all Quality of Life indicators reach their highest
levels from about 110 GJ per annum, with a flattening return beyond this point. Assuming some
variance for sparsely populated countries like Australia, it is theoretically possible to maintain
key Quality of Life indicators in Australia with perhaps a per capita consumption of 150 GJ a
year, down from the current 275 GJ. As a comparison, in the late 1960s Japan’s mean was
about 70 GJ/capita, and Germany’s in the late 1990s was 175 GJ/capita (Smil, “Crossroads”
352; Smil “Nature” 349). With increasing efficiency under intense competitive pressure, the
figure could be lower. This would certainly involve a simplification of contemporary life, with the
radical excision of many facets. It would probably be accompanied by a corresponding change
in aesthetic standards, as utility becomes the overriding principle.
Again, direct access to leisure and some form of primary harvesting, be it fishing or raising
chickens, seems to run counter to urban consolidation. Access to natural resources has proven
a crucial form of compensation in times of economic contraction, as in the Great Depression,
where it was observed that
Very many of the young men examined had never held a job and, incidentally, did not
hope for one in the future. In the case of those examined in localities in proximity to
beaches, many seemed content to drift along on the Government food allowance. Not a
few owned bicycles, and their time alternated between swimming and fishing and other
means of amateur sport (Martin 30).
Any low energy solution could not be a reversion to a previous era or a profound change in form
– the physical urban structure of today would need to be adapted with as little energy expended
as possible, hence with only necessary new building and targeted infrastructure projects. Again,
this seems to favour a decentralized system allowing individuals as much latitude as possible
for providing their own labour and fine-grained decision making.
In the broad sense, one could argue that contemporary notions of urbanity would be hard to
sustain. Pre-fossil fuel cities in rare instances may have reached one million inhabitants, but
after 1800 “rapid increases in both the population of the world’s largest cities and in the overall
shares of urban population would have been impossible without fossil fuels” (Smil, “World
History” 208). Non-fossil energy sources have generally supported much smaller cities. In 1700
less than 35 cities worldwide had populations exceeding 100,000, and perhaps 5 exceeding half
a million. The extensiveness of their energy and food production footprints simply precluded
greater numbers or density. Without being determinist, it nonetheless is difficult to imagine
energy density sources significantly lower than fossil fuels supporting a modern city. It is salient
to remember that the nineteenth century city was not a place of comfort – the aspects of density
we currently enjoy in major cities have been comprehensively sanitized by an enormous
increase in energy usage in the intervening years.
In conclusion, it seems important to stress that the argument above is not about the impossibility
of change. Rather it is an attempt to highlight some linkages between energy use and urban
form which appear to be difficult to circumvent. Whatever the energy future may prove to be –
and here one should be wary of predictions, given the complexity of the interactions of
advanced capitalism, energy and individual decision making – the major point of this paper is
that if we do not respect the utility of fossil fuels, we will find that our imaginations are not up to
the task of weaning ourselves off them.
 List of Works Cited

ABARE (Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics). Energy in Australia 2008.
Canberra: Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism, 2008.
ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics). Sydney: A Social Atlas. Canberra: ABS, 2008
---. National Regional Profile. 22 June 2009 <http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/
abs@.nsf/webpages/National+Regional+Profile>
ACF (Australian Conservation Foundation). Consumption Atlas. 22 June 2009
<http://www.acfonline.org.au/consumptionatlas/>
AllBusiness. “FPL Energy Dedicates 735 MW Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center - The World's
Largest Wind Farm.” AllBusiness. 22 June 2009 <http://www.allbusiness.com/
services/business-services/3951089-1.html>
Australian Treasury. “Mitigation Scenarios – International Results.” Australia’s Low Pollution
Future: The Economics of Climate Change Mitigation 22 June 2009
<http://www.treasury.gov.au/lowpollutionfuture/report/html/05_Chapter5.asp>
Brindle, Ray. “Transport Technology and Urban Development.” Technological Change and the
City. Ed. Patrick Troy. Sydney: The Federation Press, 1995.
Cuevas-Cubria, Clara and Damien Riwoe. Australian Energy: National and State Projections to
2029-30. ABARE Research Report 06-26. Canberra: Department of Resources, Energy
and Tourism, 2006
Dey, Christopher, Charles Berger, Barney Foran, Miles Foran, Rowena Joske, Manfred Lenzen
and Richard Wood. “Household environmental pressure from consumption: an Australian
environmental atlas.” Water Wind Art and Debate. How Environmental Concerns Impact on
Disciplinary Research. Ed. Gavin Birch. Sydney: Sydney University Press, 2007
EES (Energy Efficient Strategies). Energy Use in The Australian Residential Sector 1986-2020.
Canberra: Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, 2008.
EIA (Energy Information Administration) History of Energy in the United States: 1635-2000 22
June 2009 <http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/eh/frame.html>
“Energy Content of Australian Fuels.” Energy Today. 22 June 2009
<www.energytoday.com.au/contentid66.html>
Frost, Lionel and Tony Dingle. “Infrastructure, Technology and Change.” Technological Change
and the City. Ed. Patrick Troy. Sydney: The Federation Press, 1995.
Kemp, Rob. Power Consumption Tables. 22 June 2009 <http://users.tpg.com.au/
users/robkemp/Power/PowerConsumption.htm>
Kruger, Paul. Alternative Energy Resources: The Quest for Sustainable Energy. Hoboken: John
Wiley and Sons, 2006
Martin, A.H. “Report on vocational guidance survey, Northern Coalfield area.” Newcastle in the
Great Depression. Ed. Sheilah Gray. Newcastle History Monographs No. 11, Newcastle
(NSW): Newcastle Region Public Library, 1984.
Newman, Peter and Jeffrey Kenworthy. Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile
Dependence. Washington: Island Press, 1999.
NSW Government. “Moving People – Sydney Travel Today”. City of Cities: Sydney Metropolitan
Strategy. 22 June 2009 <http://www.metrostrategy.nsw.gov.au/
dev/uploads/paper/transport/BACKGROUND-1.html>
NSW Parliament. “Power Station Numbers.” Hansard: Questions and Answers. No. 5199 22
June 2008 <http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/la/qala.nsf/0/
5FA61BED471D7211CA2570CA00019088>
RERL (Renewable Energy Research Laboratory, University of Massachusetts at Amherst),
Wind Power: Capacity Factor, Intermittency and What Happens When the Wind Doesn’t
Blow. 22 June 2009 <http://www.ceere.org/rerl/about_wind/
RERL_Fact_Sheet_2a_Capacity_Factor.pdf>
Sharp Corporation. NTR5E3E Specifications. 22 June 2009 <http://www.sharp.net.au/product-
catalogue/products/NTR5E3E/>
Smil, Vaclav. Energy at the Crossroads : Global Perspectives and Uncertainties. Cambridge,
Mass.: MIT Press, 2003.
---. Energy in Nature and Society : General Energetics of Complex Systems. Cambridge,
Mass.; London: The MIT Press, 2008.
---. Energy in World History. Boulder: Westview Press, 1994.