Hey there! The NEOM project, particularly The Line, is sparking quite the buzz in the world of urbanism. It's a bold and somewhat contentious initiative that has everyone intrigued. In this inaugural episode of City Dive, a segment that studies in detail interesting urban projects around the world, I dig into whether this ambitious urban development experiment is set for success or failure. Let's explore the excitement together!
Sand Castle or the Future of Urban Living?
Had you told me 15 years ago that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was vying to position itself as a trend setter in carbon neutral urban development I would have certainly choked on my baklava. Today, with its NEOM megaproject in the northwest of the country, an area roughly the size of Armenia and slightly smaller than Belgium, Saudi Arabia claims to be constructing an eco-friendly utopia between the Red Sea and the Arabian Desert. Calling it “a visionary project that is set to transform the Red Sea coast of northwest Saudi Arabia into a futuristic city unlike any other”, NEOM is actually a collection of 10 projects, called regions, each with almost surreal ambition and design. The main project that catches the eye of the world is what is known as The Line.
The Line is a 170 km long, 200 m wide and 500 m tall linear city, unique in its kind, stretching from the Red Sea coast inland and expected to house more than 9 million people by 2045. Its outside walls consist entirely of reflective glass, and the inside is set to be car free, carbon neutral dense and green living and working space. Dubbed a more ecologically harmonious way to design the urban environment, The Line proposes itself as the standard of future living.
Imagining future cities and challenging established norms is of course a worthwhile endeavour. Where would we be today without the World’s Fairs of the 20th century, events purpose made to challenge the status quo? When I heard about The Line, my imagination went ablaze, thinking of how an otherwise inhospitable swath of land in the desert could transform into the world’s most densely inhabited city, 4 time the density of Manhattan and 6 times that of Manila, while maintaining sustainable and carbon neutral standards. Further research though, proved to somewhat dampen my enthusiasm for this project.
Does it Make the Grade for People, the Environment and Design?
If we look past the breathtaking artist renderings of what The Line will look like, inside and out, we can see a much more controversial reality. For one, it seems that Saudi Arabia’s record of human rights violations continues to cast a shadow over the country’s prosperity. Among the worst authoritarian regimes in the world, Freedom House gives Saudi Arabia a freedom rating of 7/100. This level of oppression seems to be mirrored in the construction of The Line, as tens of thousands of native inhabitants will be forcibly displaced without compensation to make way for the works. According to UK news outlet The Guardian, some activists have even been jailed or found dead after voicing their opposition to the project. Furthermore, working conditions have been compared to those in Qatar for the 2022 World Cup, which reportedly saw thousands of workers die due to poor security standards and unhygienic living conditions. These realities make me question whether this grand experiment is worth its human cost. The benefits humanity may gain from it will be tainted by its record of abuse and oppression.
The controversy does not end with the human aspect of the project. In fact, many have questioned the environmental sustainability prospects of a brand new metropolis built from scratch in the desert. The most intuitive question one may ask themselves about such a project is what is the carbon footprint of building what essentially amounts to two 170 km long skyscrapers facing each other. Well, according to Philip Oldfield, Head of School of the Built Environment at the University of New South Wales, the environmental cost of building The Line outweighs its benefits by a wide margin. According to him this single project would eject as much carbon in the atmosphere as the entire UK does in 4 years. Furthermore, energy generation and transmission infrastructure has to be built from scratch and could have detrimental impacts to biodiversity in the region. Speaking of biodiversity, I wonder how this 170 km glass wall impacts migration patterns of animals both in the air and on the ground, an often overlooked issue that North American highways have shown can have devastating consequences on wildlife populations.
Speaking of movement of populations, there is a very practical reason why every major city in the world, from pretty much the beginning of our civilization, has developed from a centre outwards and not in a straight line. That reason is mobility. Imagine a city designed like a bicycle wheel. All points along the rubber tyre are exactly the same distance from the centre of the wheel. This makes travel easier for residents, uses space more efficiently in the central core, and contributes to the development of a unified urban identity. On the other hand, organizing a city in a thin long line, not to mention at heights of 500 m would place residents at an impossible distance from the centre. This means multiple centres would pop up, multiplying the need for both essential services and consumer services. For context, 170 km is roughly the distance between Montreal and Ottawa or London and Birmingham. If you covered the same area (34 km2) in a circle for example, the resident furthest from the centre would be just 3.3 km, about a 30 minute walk. To counter this, The Line is set to have an underground level for a high speed train taking you from one end to the other. Despite this, the distances and the costs for managing a high speed line rather than multiple regular transport lines in a spoke-and-wheel model design should be considerable. Not to mention the level of state control needed to make sure development flows along the line and not in the organic centre-outwards way. In essence, in terms of urban design, there are way too many obstacles for me to consider this particular project attractive to live in, or indeed feasible or efficient.
What's the Bottom Line?
The NEOM project's bold vision, especially The Line's concept of a 170 km linear city, aims to be the eco-friendly urban paradise of the future. Yet, in the interests of sustainability and solidarity one is forced to consider the ethical worries that surface due to forced displacement and human rights issues, dimming its ambition. The unanswered questions around its environmental impact linger, especially regarding its carbon footprint and impact on wildlife. The unconventional design poses practical challenges, casting doubt on its feasibility. In fact, if The Line was The Circle, it would probably garner more positive reviews. While its futuristic and utopian aspirations help us to dream, I think a more practical use of its $500 billion price tag would be to densify and reorganize existing cities to make them more sustainable and just. Reusing and recycling what already exists seems to me to be a more rational exercise than creating what some say is a vanity project in the desert.
Comments