Living Green: The best (and worst) countries
We analysed data from top sources covering 141 nations to rank the planet’s greenest, most livable places.
By Matthew Kahn and Fran Lostys
Related Stories
1. Stockholm, Sweden
2. Oslo, Norway
3. Munich, Germany
4. Paris, France
5. Frankfurt, Germany
6. Stuttgart, Germany
7. Lyon, France
8. Dusseldorf, Germany
9. Nantes, France
10. Copenhagen, Denmark
11. Geneva, Switzerland
12. Zurich, Switzerland
13. Glasgow, United Kingdom
14. Barcelona, Spain
15. New York, United States
16. Brussels, Belgium
17. Hamburg, Germany
18. Hong Kong, PR China
19. Newcastle, United Kingdom
20. Tokyo, Japan
21. Helsinki, Finland
22. Washington, D.C., United States
23. Chicago, United States
24. Vancouver, Canada
25. Dortmund, Germany
26. San Francisco, United States
27. London, United Kingdom
28. Perth, Australia
29. Melbourne, Australia
30. Manchester, United Kingdom
31. Graz, Austria
32. Berlin, Germany
33. Ottawa, Canada
34. Wellington, New Zealand
35. Amsterdam, Netherlands
36. Atlanta, United States
37. Marseille, France
38. Vienna, Austria
39. Rome, Italy
40. Sydney, Australia
41. Prague, Czech Republic
42. Brisbane, Australia
43. Denver, United States
44. Berne, Switzerland
45. Singapore, Singapore
46. Houston, United States
47. Bologna, Italy
48. Montreal, Canada
49. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
50. Toronto, Canada
51. Cape Town, South Africa
52. Seoul, South Korea
53. Milan, Italy
54. Curitiba, Brazil
55. San Diego, United States
56. Madrid, Spain
57. Los Angeles, United States
58. Budapest, Hungary
59. Calgary, Canada
60. Phoenix, United States
61. Johannesburg, South Africa
62. Sao Paulo, Brazil
63. Athens, Greece
64. Tel Aviv, Israel
65. Chennai, India
66. Cracow, Poland
67. Taipei, Taiwan
68. Bangkok, Thailand
69. Guangzhou, PR China
70. Mumbai, India
71. Shanghai, PR China
72. Beijing, PR China
|
| ||||||
2 Comments |
| Trish Hunt on 17 February 2013 ,15:26 @William you obviously haven't travelled much. In Europe the trash has emptied into the North Atlantic Gyre. They've levelled their natural forests. The rivers are too polluted to swim or fish in. The irony is that they make out like they are the "greenest" cities on earth. These surveys are useless as they look only at current annual consumption, not the destruction that has occured over centuaries and has not been remedied. For example, heavy metal contamination in a European river 50 years ago doesn't count in this survey. How is this "greener" than an Australia river that never was polluted with heavy metals? |
| William on 13 February 2012 ,09:25 How Australia could be on this list is beyond my wildest imagination. I've never seen so much litter lying around the road sides, streets and beaches in a 1st world country. Then there are the coal fired power plants, and the automobile to cyclist ratio is abysmal for a country with a climate so conducive to cycling. |
Post A Comment
| Name* | |
| Email* | |
| Comment* | |
Comments are published and responded to (if required) weekly. For queries or comments relating to our Sweepstakes or product purchases from our online store, please call Customer Service on 1300 300 030 or email customerservice.au@readersdigest.com. Comments containing personal or inappropriate material may be modified or removed at our discretion.
Reader Opinions
.png){kind=small}
.png)
Advertisement
Advertisement
.jpg)
Have You Seen...
Have You Seen...
|
Life
 |
Health & Wellbeing
 |
Food & Recipes
 |
Home & Garden
 |
Reading
 |
| More in Life | More in Health | More in Food & Recipes | More in Home & Garden | More in Reading |
| Important Information |  | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Customer Care | |||||
| | |||||
 | WIN! WIN! |
