Super Eco

Photo credit: Frank Paynter, flickr

"Sustainability" is one of those words that's in danger of losing its meaning from over-use. Is it a synonym for "green?" Is it all about recycling? Does it mean lowering our standard of living? No, no, and emphatically NO according to a Scientific American article detailing some of the myths that have grown up around the concept of sustainability.

If "green" means a preference for the natural over the artificial, then it's easy to see that, while there are overlaps, sustainability isn't all about being green. There's very little that's "natural" about an electric car, yet for sustainable global development supporting the nine billion people who will be living together by 2050, high technology will be required. An emphasis on renewable resources isn't necessarily "green" unless it includes commitments to conservation and preservation of habitat and species.

Recycling, a responsible practice that conserves resources, is a piece of the sustainability puzzle. But recycling by itself falls way short of the mark. Recycling is just a ripple on the surface of the great ocean of extractive industries gobbling up non-renewable resources like there's no tomorrow. Recycling is a good habit, but we have to change how we generate energy and our transportation systems in order to live sustainably. It's going to cost a lot of money to shift manufacturing and energy production to a low carbon sustainable model, but in the end the investment will save money and it just might save the planet.

Sustainability means we'll have to do more with less, but it doesn't mean we'll have to lower our standard of living. When sustainable practices are widely adopted we'll see a productivity boom sufficient to raise the standard of living world-wide.

So "reduce, reuse, recycle." Live an organic lifestyle. Walk softly on the earth and leave a minimal carbon footprint. And do everything you can to support the enormous economic shift from a consumer culture to a sustainable one.