Politics, News & Issues >
Environment (Other)
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedIs environmental "sustainability" achievable?
Title endorsed in part by:
Results so far:
| Yes | 78% | 139 votes | Total: 178 votes | |
| No | 22% | 39 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesThe Essence of Sustainability is Adaptability
"Sustainability" is a growing buzzword around the world and it is being stretched to the limits of its interpretations by politicians, businessmen, and the popular media. It is today applied as haphazardly as possible, referring one moment to the sustainable' operating practices of big business (read: sustaining their profits) and another to the sustainability' of our nation's natural resources (read: sustaining extraction, not renewability). The word sustainability is tricky, and in reality the trait of sustainability cannot be quantified, measured, or assessed objectively in any way. Sustainable' is not a quality, it is a prediction. We observe that certain systems in nature are very, very old savannas, coral reefs, rainforests and we infer that they must have some ability to sustain themselves throughout time. Our exploration of their sustainability has almost always lead us to notice that solar energy drives their whole systems, and that they place the highest premium on the retention and recirculation of nutrients. As a result, humanity today believes that we can achieve sustainability by switching to solar energy and by recycling. The impacts of solar power and recycling on the Earth's health today are obvious; that is, they are minimal if apparent at all.
The aforementioned solutions are good ones, albeit limited in their application. Solar power and recycling make very good business ideas which fit into the current economic system. That system, however, is tuned fundamentally towards un-sustainability in that it is required to grow without limit, to maximize profit, and to empower those with access to capital over those without, a condition which is primarily determined by (often unjust) cultural and historical norms. Because of this, typical market-driven' solutions are insufficient to achieve true sustainability. Instead, we must understand the underlying behaviors and characteristics of examples of sustainability in nature in order to achieve, and to benefit from achieving, environmental sustainability in any meaningful sense. When this goal has been fully articulated and understood in terms germane to the environment, that is, in terms of the co-evolution, symbiosis, and survival of neighbor elements in an ecosystem, then realizing such a future state is understood to not only be readily achievable, but ultimately inevitable. An essential element of the ecological model of sustainability is the rapid and systemically beneficial culling of or extirpation of an incompatible species.
Let's take a moment to re-examine the savanna for more clues as to why it has persisted for millions of years. First, we notice that there is balance between consumers and production there are billions of grass plants, millions of ungulates, thousands of hyenas and big cats. No entity is allowed to over-consume without facing the consequences, which range from temporary hardship to starvation and death. Conversely, no entity is allowed to under-consume without facing similar consequences if for example lions were regularly fed meat by humans, they would probably reduce their predation of wildebeests. Wildebeests would overpopulate, overgraze, and thereby trigger a crisis for all other species on the savanna. These slight over and under consumption scenarios do regularly happen, but because of the diversity of species, there is always some entity prepared to exploit the temporary abundance of wildebeest, absence of lion, or lack of competition from grass. Therefore, the fluctuations are constant but small, resulting in exceedingly stable ecosystems over the long-term. We can draw three principles from this example: every entity has a responsibility to its habitat, every element in the system is equally important, and the diversity of elements promotes stability. Observing these principles has both altruistic and self-serving results.
Learn more about this author, James Glavin.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
My instinct tells me that mankind will never make headway concerning the environment because too many people profit from investments in the old and proven way. The one thing that jumps out at me is the fact that the major cause of global warning is the expellation of gas by bovine. Eighteen percent of the problem comes from cows that have been around since time began. We can certainly fix a large portion of our polution problem by turning the family cow to food. Then we can not only reduce the problem eighteen percent: but we can feed the hungry of the world and fix two problems at once: total cost is zero.
Our use of coal which until now has gained a reputation as anti environment now it has been revealed that technology has been available to use coal for energy that does not pollute. This is a great find after our President William Jefferson Clinton signed an Executive Order to stop the mining of the worlds best coal: when he declared the Grand Escalante Staircase a national park and declared this coal off limits.This move gave China control over this coal as a payoff for their political support. An added addition allowing Chinese generals access to our technology. Especially that of gyro technology so that they can launch long range missiles with nuclear warheads with the capability of attacking those that they deem as enemies.
As anyone can realize that not only is this action detrimental to the world's climate as these explosives shake the earth off of it's axis and feeds the teetering of the planets rotation. Since the great earth quake in Indonesia, moved an island, sent a title-wave,killing thousands, the earth began wobbling on it's axis and affecting weather patterns as our environment gets more erratic.
The production of ethanol to replace gasoline, a fossil fuel, has a range of problems that will range well into the future. Many of the bi-products of this process, not only consumes precious resources such as water to process this fuel at a 170 to 1 ratio of water to ethanol plus a shortage of food for what is called a starving people in the third world. These lands are considered as worthless for food growing. Using up corn resources for fuel only makes the shortage more critical. Inflation of food prices is the first bi-product as quantities dwindle.
To further complicate this process are increased costs and decreased results. With a thirty percent drop in fuel efficiency, we are faced with two major problems. Requiring ten gallons of fuel to do what was done with only seven: because the motorized chariot that has faithfully taken families safely from place to place will become very inefficient. The auto which previously obtained twenty four miles to the gallon will now get only sixteen point eight mpg. This is now magnified by the problem of raising this to thirty five mpg by 2020, as has been approved by our steadfast politicians.
As anyone can observe, we now have a major dilemma; this new goal is already unobtainable because we will have to almost double the existing mileage in the next thirteen years; when we have failed since the nineteen sixties when a six cylinder Ford Falcon obtained twenty mpg.
Just maybe, we should encourage those who control the money to release the technology that they bought up over the years, the technology of garage mechanics and engineers. Amazingly this technology that threatened industries, great job losses and economic collapse as the investors in the old technology lost their control over the auto industry. Populace now would have more money if a vehical was fuel efficient an got one hundred mpg.
Mankind has a very large problem at the very beginning of our efforts is that we do not understand the extent of the problem, if one exsists at all. To continue to jump at theory and not scientific fact leads us down the deep hole of no escape. New chemicals that are created, chemicals foreign to the natural balance. When we find the error of our ways, we may be too late correct our problem.
Learn more about this author, Francis Palmieri.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Environment (Other)
- Will technology spare the earth?
- Is it fair to ask underdeveloped countries to "go green" when many advanced industrial countries owe their success to destructive environmental practices?
- Should the banking industry be nationalized?
- Environmentalists: Do they do more good or more harm?
- What is more important: Alternative fuels or affordable food?
- Are we over regulating our environment?
