Sustainability

[Sassy]

Moved here from Panama Trip Report - split this off to a new subject.  What the innocuous term "Sustainability" means to most of us and  actuality is more like a wolf in sheeps clothing.  Glenn

Quote from Lodestar:
"We live in a state forest on 50 acres of land...there is a private 40 about a mile and a half south of our place...which has a small lake that was planted to wild rice in a cooperative effort between Ducks Unlimited and the DNR.  Well, the 40 has had a house on it for almost as long as I've been here...22 years.  It's back off the road so you can't see it...now, it's been sold and the person who bought it is proposing to build 12 more houses on the 40.  A cul-de-sac has already been cut in...and the lots will all nest around that driveway, staring at each other.  The lots are 2.5 acres for the most part...although some are a bit smaller, around 2 acres.  There's a lot of wetlands on the 40...and trumpeter swans nest on the little wildrice lake across the road.

I'm feeling encroached upon.  There are no other developments of this nature around here.  This is precedent setting.

I don't view land as commodity.  I have a sense of this place.  I feel it deep in my soul.  I have an understanding with the other inhabitants of these woods, and generally get along better with them than I do humankind.  (no offense meant)...

Just venting, I guess.  But I'd sure like to see sustainability become a part of the American lexicon.

Crying deep inside for the countryside...and for my country."

Lodestar, your posting struck a deep note in my heart... that's why I started this topic on sustainability... from all my reading about Agenda 21's plan for sustainability---we will all be living in highly dense communities staring at each other & if we don't like it, there are plenty of developments for the dissenters, in fact Halliburton has been given another very lucrative contract by our gov't for "independent thinkers..."

Food for thought...  articles for your reading pleasure...   :-/  Kathy

"The Matrix"

Agenda 21

Sustainability

The Permanent Revolution

World Heritage Map

Globalization

PS:  In the Airforce Times a few months ago an article stated that there had been over 100,000 injured American soldiers in the present Iraq war.  My dad (30 yr career  officer in the Airforce--B52 instructor pilot) made the understatement... "They lied to us."  (if you read any of the mainline media, they recently stated there were only 17,000+ injured.) I welcome your comments, thoughts, arguments for/against & if you have them, links to articles...
Thanks, Sassy
(by the way, I didn't get the name Sassy because I'm so sassy   --- when I was younger, my little sister couldn't pronounce "Kathy" & the name Sassy" stuck...  of course it couldn't be because I occasionally live up to the name...  

[ailsaek]

A bit frothing at the mouth, some of it, but interesting.  I don't tend to believe that They are as organized or as good at planning as some of those articles would have it.  Not that this makes Them nicer or less needing to be watched, of course.

One thing I've been wondering at with all the runaway development - where are all these people coming from who are buying all these homes?  They can't be the local kids growing up & buying houses - the kids can't afford to live here.

[jraabe]

Many of them are people who used to live with others.

Over the last 50 years the size of houses has gone up (something like 1200sf to 2400sf) while the number of people living in the house has gone down (something like 3.2 to 1.9). This has pushed demand for housing much higher and faster than demographics (population forces) alone would do.

Sorry, I couldn't find better numbers.

[jraabe]

[size=16]How to turn almost anything into an Unstoppable Force of Righteousness[/size]

I find that most people are pretty decent once you accept the fact that we're all basically selfish and interested in our own ideas and welfare. That's OK as long as folks respect the rights of others to have the same freedoms we expect to have for ourselves. The interaction of all these self-centered organisms makes for an interesting if perhaps somewhat messy world.

Nature, economics and other natural systems are pretty good at sorting this messiness out if it is left on its own. There are knocks and bumps along the way for everyone, of course. We call those lessons, and, if were smart, we might be able to learn from them.

Much more dangerous, however, is the ideologue - the one who has an image of how the world SHOULD be. Now we can get into some real pain and suffering. No need to learn lessons from those wimpy natural feedback loops, we are on the side of righteousness! For the ideologue, people and their rights are just getting in the way of the mission.

And, in the hands of ideologues, ecology, or almost anything else, can end up being a type of religious jihad.

"Off with their heads!" and other "final solutions" come to mind for the jihadist.

[bil2054]

It is my not so humble opinion, formulated thirty something years ago, that the vast majority of human ills can be traced to population pressure. Nearly every atrocity, war, or crime can be at some point traced to the quest for lebensraum, (you have something I want/need, and I'm going to take it from you.)  
Granted that the greatest advances in science, medicine, and social developement have also been inspired by these same pressures, I fear that we are experiencing an inexorable downward spiral of diminishing returns.
"Sustainability" means that the net average consumption of the individual must be matched by a net average production.  My guess is that 90% of us, as Americans, are running an 80% deficit on that equation.
A statistic taught in my freshman Eco Science course was that the US produced fifty percent of the world's food supply, (Yay, Us!), but that fifty percent of that was thrown away, either in processing or after reaching the table, (Boo!)  So in 1972 it was estimated that we threw away 25% of the available world food supply.  I suspect the ratio is even worse now, since fear of litigation has stopped many organizations from donating surplus food to charitable groups.
My point here is that sustainable living will only ever be achieved by a small, and laudable, percentage of the existing population.  (I hope and pray that those same folks will be the surviving population.)  The "average" citizen has neither the wit to understand the neccesity, nor the will to undertake the endeavor.  Unfortunately many of us with the wit naetheless are also lacking the will.
Sorry to sound so pessimistic.  Look on the bright side... if we continue as we have, Mother Earth will give a good shake like a hound with fleas, and the stage will be set for the next great experiment.
[smiley=undecided.gif]

[peg_688]

 I should just let this one go as it is sort of politcal and also could be mis understood very easly I think.

  I mostly agree with MW and I'll use my Island to make my point and he/ her point in some ways as well.

 I've been here on Whidbey since 1978 many changes have taken place in that short time , most of that was just "Normal growth" , ever village / town / city has some growth it is normal.

 But what is sort of different is as we grow city people either for retirement or work in a rural setting come in and what do they want once they settle in , better roads , bigger wider roads , mass transit for the "Masses" .   We need a city run pool , heck country kids swim in a pond  but no we NEED a pool .  Oh ya and a bigger liberay ya we need that ,   well and while where at it ya know that Naval air station thats been here since 1942 or so   those jet are really loud  ya know they shouldn't be able to fly at night as much etc ,  So hey also the farms around here they nice but ya know they sort of smell, lets make a whole bunch of extra rules about how , where , etc Mr. Farmer can use HIS LAND . Now we'd also like to get premo tax dollars out of Mr. Farmer while we're  at it.  And can ya stop those cows from Mooing so early ya know Mr. City guy is retired now and they wake him up .

  So it's a slow rentless aquision of his rights over well just about everyone else's . Land values go sky high country becomes the burbs or  city like . Farmers sell the cows , then ya know what they need money,,,, so no cows to feed ,,, will lets grow HUNDREDS of house's , with HUNDREDS of septic systems and more water needs for people who BTW throw they're human PIG S$IT out of their nice new car window , whats that carbon foot print thing    

  So I do see what MW is saying , although it starts all nice good intentions etc . The rural nature of small places changes , for the better???  but change is going to happen.

 And yes I did have my part in all this ,in a way, I eat / build / work / etc yad yad yad.   I also don't tell people what to do with thier land , they want to sell to Wal mart / Home depot well It's thier land not mine .

 They say in the San Jauns I got mine pull up the rope . Meaning lets stop everyone else from coming / buying in , and they / some folks come up with NEW rules to keep others out , CRAZY stuff really selfish , and I think that is what Billy Bob was saying only using really big words , PEOPLE ARE MOSTLY ALL ABOUT THEMSELFS. Basic human nature , IMO.

 Hope I didn't step on any toes , but it's sort of how I see it  , PEG

[Amanda_931]

For me sustainability means that people a couple of generations on can live more or less comfortably.

(I'd still recommend Judith Moffett's Ragged World for the kind of changes that that might mean)

[glenn-k]

Wow - PEG - you are such a radical.

I think you have a pretty good handle on it.

If you don't like planes and their noise, don't buy property under the takeoff or approach ends of the runway - or even near the airport.  Leave that to people who like such things.  

I'm not sure about all of what you said though -- are you trying to say that the world doesn't revolve around me? :-/  I'll hear nothing of that sort of nonsense.

[peg_688]

 Well in a round about way you could say that , we generally blame it all on to many rich [highlight]Californians[/highlight] You think Az. needs border guards   PEG

[Sassy]

Thanks for all your comments!  I started reading about Agenda 21 about a year ago (had heard it mentioned in the news so figured I better learn something about it)  Anyway, I've attempted, several times, to read it on the United Nations website (you can Google it, lots of listings-didn't save my last link) It sounds like a lot of bureaucratic double talk    so that's why I went to this illustrious forum on CountryPlans.  I figured there were a lot of smart people here who seemed to be well-read & maybe someone had deciphered what it was actually saying.  I've had to resort to others' commentaries to try & sort it out...  

I agree, man is a selfish being (women aren't...   ) --- we have children & grandchildren & want them to live in an inhabitable world... & I agree with sustainability if it means being a responsible person, taking care of what I have, attempting to do the least amount of damage to the environment, living peaceably with my neighbor & doing my part for the community.  After all, I look at CountryPlans (that John has provided for us) to learn how to do stuff & love the community & freedom we have here!   I enjoy having land & a place to build our own home with all the uniqueness we can dream up  :-?.

If Agenda 21 means socialism or communism, where a few rule & make the decisions & the rest of the "useless eaters" either do what they're told or suffer the consequences, its been proven a dictatorship doesn't work.  Socialism/communism would only work if we were a perfect people & had perfect rulers.  I believe man is meant to have freewill & will fight against constraints like that.  Basic laws need to be in place or we would have chaos.  To quote Jesus & Glenn... "loving your neighbor as yourself" will cause you to take care of the environment & each other, don't you think?     Sassy

PS:  to quote Rodney King... "Can't we all just get along?"  

[bartholomew]

The issue really is not about the transfer of ownership of any particular property. As a fair trade is made, both seller and buyer are left better off. The seller obviously preferred the money to the land. The buyer likewise preferred the land to the money. However, the neighbors who are not party to the exchange can be made either better or worse off. The new owner can have a positive influence on the community in many ways, by becoming part of it, exchanging ideas and stories, providing assistance and maybe expertise with local projects, etc. The new owner could also keep to herself, avoiding interaction with her neighbors, which would probably be a small net loss for them.

The big loss, though, comes when a new arrival tries to change things in the community, especially if he hasn't been there long enough to understand why things are the way they are to begin with. On the island communities around here, it often seems that newcomers want to bring their former fast-paced lives with them... lobby for more frequent/larger ferries, 18 hole golf course, starbucks, etc... while at the same time insisting on their own misguided view of what island life should be. Suddenly you find that the familiar Joe's Store has transformed into Ye Old Country Shoppe, and you now live in a Disneyfied version of your former community.

Gentrification is a touchy issue. And of course it is not limited to pastoral country neighborhoods. Where I live, people paid $$$$$ for spectacular apartments overlooking our working harbor only to complain about the noise of float planes landing and taking off. As cities densify, homeowners decry the fact that their children will never be able to buy in the neighborhoods where they grew up. As older, and often poorer, neighborhoods are redeveloped, existing residents get pushed out, or if not pushed out then left feeling estranged with so much of the familiar wiped away.

Change is of course to be expected and planned for, but it has to occur at a slow enough pace for people to adjust to it.

[glenn-k]

That seems to be a common thread through all the responses, Bart.

The locals here in our rather poor mountain community make a few extra dollars with yard sales often - tack up signs - take them down quite well.  We got a bunch of new CHP Officers (cops) from the big city a few years ago.  The first thing they did was go around taking the signs down because it wasn't allowed in the big city.  A small uprising seemed to put a stop to that.  When in Rome do as the Romans do.  (This advice works well at hot springs too.) :-/

[bil2054]

Well, PEG, you understood me just fine, and I apologise a bit for the fancy words.  
Years ago I was labeled, by the principal of the local, public elementary school, as retarded.  I worked very hard to overcome that stigma, and now I can't help it when all those hard won vocabulary words come out! [smiley=evil.gif]  (I think I'm actually "smarter" than he was... they just hadn't "invented" ADD yet.)
Anyway, everybody seems to agree that the pain-in-the-neckedness seems to come from more folks coming in where they previously weren't, and generally making nuisances of themselves trying to change things that have been fine up until now, thankee kindly.  The reason they do this is because things got too crowded, and too many things changed in the place they used to be.  So they move to a place where there's enough room to breathe again, but they like the comforts they had "back home".
Well, yeah, I can be persistent, but it is the subject I feel most strongly about.  To me, ZPG is more than a passing intellectual fancy; it is a downright neccesity.  You can only go so far with conservation and marvellous new, more effecient devices.  If you keep stuffing the bag, the bottom falls out.
We either need a few less kids per capita, (and I love children, but have decided not to contribute to "the problem"; you BET it hurts!), or ramp up that space exploration pretty hard.
Make it so. [smiley=wink.gif]

[Sassy]

BillyBob, what does ZPG stand for?

My main concern is that the UN Agenda 21 will eventually take those decisions away from us with "international" laws & governance.   Although the wording, if you can understand it, sounds very altruistic, the bottom line is an international body of rulers are making the rules & our leaders have signed our country up to follow them.  That means no more local governance anymore, either.  There are some, for sure, who would rather have it that way - there's a lot of wonderful statements about helping the poor, women, disabled & children.  I am all for that, but how are they planning on doing that?  Sounds to me like they plan on taking from the haves & giving to the have nots & equalizing all the people of the world - echoes of the former Soviet Union?  Population control is a big part of it too - China limits births to 1 per woman, mandatory birth control & abortion for more than 1 child.  The Netherlands support euthanasia... it was for just the elderly & disabled, now I think they were trying to pass something for young children (not just babies up to 9 months still in the womb)...  welcome Brave New World & Big Brother. BillyBob, you've chosen to not have any children - it's your choice, though, nobody is forcing it on you.  

As a teenager I worked in a peach packing plant packing peaches for 10-12 hrs day 6-7 days a week in 100+ weather during the summers--I chose to do that, if I worked hard, I made good money, as it was piece work - my girlfriends & I were the fastest packers there.  A few years later, it was automated & it was probably just minimum wage (I didn't work there anymore) - good for the company but not as much incentive to work as hard... just human nature I guess.  The company kept growing, had to build a lagoon to treat the waste products that were left.  People started building homes way out in the country next to the packing plant.  Then those people started complaining to the city leaders about the smell, that they didn't like it--there was a big legal battle, don't remember how it turned out.  I know I'm all over the place with this, but it kinda covers a lot of ground by the different examples, I hope  :-/ ?

Some people welcome the changes to international law & believe we shouldn't have nationalism, a lot of people believe in total control of the population by whatever means it takes.  Yes, change is going to happen, it always does, but I want to, hopefully, have some sort of say in that change & not have it forced upon me unawares...  

[Jimmy_Cason]

Rural development..... Let me tell this very recent story...

This past Monday I had to meet with the electrical engineer of the Local Electric co-op.
I thought it was strange that he wanted to meet with me "Face -to Face" after he came out and looked my lot over the week before.
The power lines and poles in my area ends several lots away, the power company will need to remove the two old oak trees in my nearest neighbors front yard. They will take out 5 or 6 seventy-foot pine trees and all of the other trees approx. 15 feet back from the power line on the lots between us.
He told me to go to the appraisal department and find out who owned the property that would have the trees removed. He told me I have the right to do what ever I need to get power to you, but I just want to let people know what is about to happen to their property as a small kindness about a horrible thing.

Nothing says Howdy Neighbor like cutting up their front yard.  

[glenn-k]

What about underground - too expensive?

[Jimmy_Cason]

I am sure it is cheaper for them to extend power to my lot by going overhead rather than underground. I guess tree removal must be cheap out here. The guy told me, Because we pay to get power to your lot we will take the cheapest and shortest route within the utility easement. I have sent him a request asking them to jump the power line across the street and take out trees on the other side that is not developed rather than the two oak trees.

I do plan on underground service from the pole to my house.

[bil2054]

Sassy, ZPG stands for "Zero Population Growth".

It was an idea formulated back when it was becoming obvious that our environment could not withstand continued unchecked growth of such rapacious consumers as ourselves.

Ideally folks would reproduce at exactly the population replacement rate, i.e. approximately 2.5 children per couple.  The number is 2.5 because not everybody survives to reproduce.

It is true that nobody has forced the choice on me.  I take the proposition and the neccesity seriously, and so I practice what I preach.  It is a decision I made knowing full well that far too few would follow suit, until the choice was made for them.  Unfortunately too many people believe it is their right to have as many children as they want, and want the rest of society to provide for them.

I want the human race to survive and realize its potential.  Sustainable living is one of the key factors in accomplishing that, and a sustainable population size is a primary requirement for sustainability.

I keep hearing Chuck Heston in the background of my mind: "Soylent Green is people!"
[smiley=tongue.gif]

Sorry, I'm not usually so political... I may calm down some once I git to the wide open spaces. [smiley=wink.gif]

[Sassy]

Thanks for clarifying the ZPG, BillyBob - it seemed familiar to me but I couldn't remember what it meant.  I agree with you that you shouldn't have kids if you can't take care of them... maybe if there weren't so many free gov't handouts rewarding those who are unwilling to take responsibility... it's a big sacrifice on your part to give up having children for the good of others, but it should be each person's decision

I remember Soylent Green!  I've gotten more political as I've gotten older... whether it does any good, sometimes I wonder - it can be depressing...

   

God I got to go build something , I feel dirty  

PEG

(I went & baked some cookies instead :-? )

[glenn-k]

I agree with you that you shouldn't have kids if you can't take care of them...

(I went & baked some cookies instead :-? )

I agree but wonder if I should stay in practice in case I change my mind.

Now I think I better go check out those cookies. :-/

[Amanda_931]

Underground utilities?

Some of my neighbors (they ended up buying more land so they could get electricity with a shorter wire run) were told that the utility company only did poles.  They were happy to have you rent a ditch witch or hire somebody with one to run the lines in underground.  But the company didn't do it.  But even with the extra 5 or so acres getting electric service to their place only cost about $1500-$2000 more than having the utility company run all the poles at $750/pole.

So you might check.

Still might not be very good for those trees to have the ditch witch saw through a lot of their roots, though.

(The phone company, on the other hand, does underground wires unless they have to do something like go over a river.  There are little green posts every so often where they can tap into the system.)

[glenn-k]

It is the same around here - underground is at the expense of the user - the power co. specs out what they want.  I've done one in this area -several in the valley and used to operate equipment burying phone lines for the phone co.

[glenn-k]

One of the things that comes to mind on the sustainability issue is the use of fossil fuels.  Biodiesel comes to mind as one of the partial answers to the possible shortage of fuel, but this article says that after you get the grease from the vats of your local big corporate choke and puke, the biodiesel drive starts to be a cause of the destruction of rainforests.

Biodiesel - Worse Than Fossil Fuel
http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2005/12/06/worse-than-fossil-fuel/

[Sassy]

I came across this simple method for keeping food fresh, water cool... especially if you don't have refrigeration...

http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2004/september/refrigeration.htm

[jraabe]

Sustainability...

Looked it up. To sustain something means to:
• nourish it
• support from below
• maintain it

Also, definition number 7 is "keep pretense going: to maintain a pretense successfully"

That pretty much covers all the bases, don't you think?  

If we want to explore the topic of "sustaining the earth - what would it take?" that is an interesting topic but one we know far less about than we probably think we do. The earth is a very complex, self-balancing uber-organism that has no vested interest in our opinions about what "she" needs. She was here long before we were and will exist long after we are all gone.

This thin green coating of organic slime is an interesting experiment and one that might produce the equivalent of a half-smile if we could see such a thing. Of course, all the flappings of human egos and dire predictions of doom are also a source of ongoing amusement, I expect.

Since this forum is about housing, let's ask ourselves a proper question to see where it will lead... Here's a start at that question:

• What characteristics would a house have in order to be sustaining of the earth?

What question would you ask or how would you alter this one? (We won't get decent answers until we ask the right question... what is the best big-picture question?)