Living Car Free - none of you are sustainable

Ive been mostly a lurker in this forum, because as an Environmental Educator, I find many of your discussions amusing. There are a lot of misconceptions around here as to what the impacts of your life are.

Well, I decided to chime in after I read a few of the responses in the last "sustainable" thread.

The real deal is that if you live in this country (USA) you will not be sustainable. End of story. I dont care how much you ride your bike, our infrastructure and lifestyle is irreversibly linked to oil. By simply living in a building and buying food at a grocery, you already consume more oil than the earth can support.

Sustainable is not a feel good thing that you are consuming less than the average american. Sustainable means that your lifestyle can be continued for generations without worry about running out of resources. This is simply not possible, even with the most meager lifestyles in the USA. Even "freegans" rely on the fat of the system to provide them with the excesses they find in the trash.

Why am I posting this? Well throughout bikeforums, I note that most people are fellow cyclists, just here to talk bikes. But in this forum, there seems to be a class system in place, where those that are "car-free" (which is a lie, nobody is car-free) are the "best" and the continually talk down to those that are "car-lite" as if they are in some way better people. And then there are those that think they are better because they left the USA, but they most likely did it on an airplane, an oil-based luxury that 90% of the world will never experience.

Im not challenging people to be more ecologically sound. I drive a car. I ride a bike too. Im just hoping that this caste system and claims of being "sustainable" will go away, because it just makes the people making those claims look ridiculous and petty.

The real deal is that if you live in this country (USA) you will not be sustainable.

"In this country"? What, did Bikeforums.net become exclusively American since last I posted?


But in this forum, there seems to be a class system in place, where those that are "car-free" (which is a lie, nobody is car-free)

Speak for yourself, I am car-free. Perhaps you claim exclusive rights to define the term "car-free"? I do not own a personal-use motor vehicle, and never have, therefore I am car-free. Too bad if you don't like that.



Im not challenging people to be more ecologically sound. I drive a car. I ride a bike too. Im just hoping that this caste system and claims of being "sustainable" will go away, because it just makes the people making those claims look ridiculous and petty.

So basically you wanted to rant. Got it. Feel better?

So now that you have told me that I am not car-free (funny, just checked, the driveway is still empty); and now that you have poo-pooed trying to live sustainably, just what are you doing that you think is so much better than what contributors here have accomplished? Why don't you go for a drive in your car, think about it a bit, then tell us how you are a more responsible person that the "ridiculous" and "petty" people here. :rolleyes:

Hi velotimbe,

In brief, what is "environmental education"? I'm very curious.

You do make some good points, but I think most of us who talk about 'sustainable' are just trying to do our best to move in that direction. Yes, even by buying food and living in a building, we are indirectly using oil, but these are basic necessities - if I could exist using little or no oil at all, I would, but as things are currently set-up, I can't.

Again, I think we're just talking about working within the current structure to be as close to sustainable as possible.

Hi velotimbe,

In brief, what is "environmental education"? I'm very curious.

Ditto.

Im not challenging people to be more ecologically sound. I drive a car. I ride a bike too. Im just hoping that this caste system and claims of being "sustainable" will go away, because it just makes the people making those claims look ridiculous and petty.

And you aren't doing a ****ing thing
to help by *****ing like this on the forum.
Go find a solution yourself genius
and come tell us about it. Or leave
us alone. You are either part of
the problem or the solution and
you sound like a ****ing obstructionist
to sustainability with your neysaying
B*LLSH*T!

Hi Velotimbe:

I'm sure that by posting as you did, you must have expected that others would jump on you. I'll just add my body to the pile-on. Please don't take it personally:

It's true that we here in North America consume way more resources per capita than can be sustained for more than, say, the next few decades. I've divided the total proven oil reserves of the planet by the annual oil consumption of all the humans that are alive, and, assuming that increases in demand will be canceled out by discoveries of new reserves, we have enough oil to last 45 years. If we further assume that estimated reserves are over-stated, and that geologically-driven price increases create a world-wide depression long before the oil actually runs out, realistically, we have about 20 years to get our sh** together before things get truly nasty. Let's not even talk about global warming.

Ok, my point: We have a little maneuvering room to deal with the twin disasters of climate change and the end of oil. But not much. All of us have to start acting right now to avert total disaster. Even if we as a species do everything in our power, we're still in for a very rough ride. If we do nothing, as you appear to be doing, all of us are totally f***ed. Personally, I'd rather act, even if initally that involves nothing more than giving up my car, and advocating for a total about-face in my science classrooms. If a lot of people do the same thing, maybe good things will start to happen.

You're an environmental educator, right? What are you doing, telling your students not to bother doing anything, because it's hopeless, so they might as well enjoy their SUV's as long as they can? Why don't you quit mocking people as you pump CO2 into the atmosphere with your car, and actually start doing something besides criticising the pitiful efforts of others?

Okay, I'm done sharing my opinion. I'm going to get on my bike now, and buy organic beer in recyclable glass containers.

"In this country"? What, did Bikeforums.net become exclusively American since last I posted?



This guy's even from BC. :p

I'm not even going to get into the mud-slinging, but I actually enjoy being car-free*. Count me out of your accusations, velotimbe.

Having no car keeps me healthy, it's simpler, I own fewer things (which allows me to easily move from place to place), I absolutely love bicycles, and I give fewer dollars to the oil/automotive/insurance/DMV racket than I would otherwise. It's not all altruistic to me. I don't just do this to be 'environmentally correct.'

I'm not sure what your point is about freegans, by the way: Freegans make use of food that would otherwise decay and go uneaten. I don't see how they're doing anything that a common raccoon wouldn't. Are raccoons part of the sustainability problem?

As for your main point, that we are none of us free of guilt, are we not less free of it than if we drove everywhere? How can you successfully argue against that?

*And no I don't try to heap guilt on car-lite people. I have given multiple kudos to car-lite folk in the past.

Jack***. Your mom looks like a....

Feeling threatened by the O.P. ? Just stay coherent and focused on the topic. ;) This is only light duty trolling.

Well, when I was taking my environmental studies courses many years ago, they were predicting that the globe would be completely starved by now, out of gas and completely polluted. Things have not exactly happened as they predicted.

I try to do what I can, keep consumption down, ride my bike where I can. Truthfully, I do a lot better than most people. Does it make me better? I don't know. It's not something in my thought queue. Is it infinitely sustainable? That's not an issue. People will not live as I do in 1,000 years no matter what happens. Your argument is a strawman.

Babies are the key factor in sustainability. I had a friend whose sister had over 100 descendents. Thats a lot for any living person. I could lead the life of an oil glutton and do less damage than she did even if all of her descendents became Jainist Monks.

Most of the people in the forum are pretty accepting of any efforts toward a car-free lifestyle. I hadn't noticed a caste. I guess you need one. Other forums have their values. Shaving, fancy tricks, vehicular riding... Any castes there as here are only in the minds of the disapprover. Here, that would be you.

What you may miss is that car-free is not an Ecological choice. It may be, but it isn't necessarily. Cars take room, cars separate you from your surroundings, they cause you to rush and lead a scattered life. They are expensive, they drive you towards debt. Bicycles have been objected to ever since the draisienne. Being car-free is a life style and I enjoy coming here where it is celebrated.

Well, when I was taking my environmental studies courses many years ago, they were predicting that the globe would be completely starved by now, out of gas and completely polluted. Things have not exactly happened as they predicted.

I try to do what I can, keep consumption down, ride my bike where I can. Truthfully, I do a lot better than most people. Does it make me better? I don't know. It's not something in my thought queue. Is it infinitely sustainable? That's not an issue. People will not live as I do in 1,000 years no matter what happens. Your argument is a strawman.

Babies are the key factor in sustainability. I had a friend whose sister had over 100 descendents. Thats a lot for any living person. I could lead the life of an oil glutton and do less damage than she did even if all of her descendents became Jainist Monks.

Most of the people in the forum are pretty accepting of any efforts toward a car-free lifestyle. I hadn't noticed a caste. I guess you need one. Other forums have their values. Shaving, fancy tricks, vehicular riding... Any castes there as here are only in the minds of the disapprover. Here, that would be you.

What you may miss is that car-free is not an Ecological choice. It may be, but it isn't necessarily. Cars take room, cars separate you from your surroundings, they cause you to rush and lead a scattered life. They are expensive, they drive you towards debt. Bicycles have been objected to ever since the draisienne. Being car-free is a life style and I enjoy coming here where it is celebrated.

:beer:

I'm afraid my point was missed, but that is okay too.

I spent a brief stint living in the jungle with "sustainable" crew of people on a permaculture farm. They were self contained and reduce, reused, and recycled. However, what happens when they grow to 20, 200, 2000...? Even this system of sustainability was not sustainable. Not everyone can live in this lush place because it would begin to look like New York. Do we blame these people for being on their high sustainable horse when actually their lives are not sustainable? No, we commend them for what they do in order to slow the aging process of our mother earth. Or some 5h1t like that...anyway...

Oil is indeed far reaching, but when the price of oil surpasses the price of developing/using other more environmentally/economicallly friendly resources, we will move in another direction. The oil companies know this, and if we knew it we'd be a much more powerful consumer.

Now Mr. Troll, where is that billy goat?

After reading a little about the field of Environmental Education, I'm thinking that the OP was simply giving us the consensus view of most environmental educators.

The educational materials I found on the web (which are intended to be used for students in grades 9-12) barely touch on resource conservation and lifestyle adaptations. They are very heavy on nature conservation and the control of industrial pollution.

After reading a little about the field of Environmental Education, I'm thinking that the OP was simply giving us the consensus view of most environmental educators.

The educational materials I found on the web (which are intended to be used for students in grades 9-12) barely touch on resource conservation and lifestyle adaptations. They are very heavy on nature conservation and the control of industrial pollution.

Such education materials which are
largely bought and paid for by
Greenwashing 'think tanks' funded
by BIG OIL and the automakers.

This has been going on since the
Ronnie Raygun's Republican revolution
days and is tired action. That's why when
I see boyscouts out collecting trash on the
beach I laugh. They are all living in
DENIAL of the most critical issues of our
times by suggesting that if we recycle
pop bottles and clean the beach that 'we
will survive.' (Not that there is anything
wrong with cleaning the beach or recycling
pop bottles, but the real issues are off the
table thanks to BIG OIL, the Auto Industry,
and Groups like the 'wise use movement.'

They fiddle while Rome burns!

PS: I would just like to say that I treasure
this specific forum and this Thread as it
gives me an opportunity to clarify what
I consider to be the truth, and 'usually'
to respond in a civil manner without use
of the F word. :O)

...the real issues are off the
table...

Yes, that was something I picked up on but I couldn't quite put my finger on it. In environmental education, the real issues are off the table. Very good point, Ned.

Im not challenging people to be more ecologically sound. I drive a car. I ride a bike too. Im just hoping that this caste system and claims of being "sustainable" will go away, because it just makes the people making those claims look ridiculous and petty.
What looks ridiculous and petty is criticizing people who put their money where their mouth is as far as the environment, pollution and natural resources are concerned, because you're too lazy to do the same. Go take Psyche 101, it's called "projection." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection)

Car-free is a big commitment, we have to make extra plans, some potential mates won't give you the time of day, and things like rural areas and children make it a huge time investment, so why troll a forum made to give helpful tips to like-minded others? Does it somehow threaten you that others are willing to make the sacrifices you won't? I realize, the guy in the Prius and the guy in the Escalade are both using gas, but, by your logic, the guy in the Prius should have never tried in the first place, and that's lousy. Begone with you, troll.

This guy's even from BC. :p

:roflmao:

The real deal is that if you live in this country (USA) you will not be sustainable. End of story. I dont care how much you ride your bike, our infrastructure and lifestyle is irreversibly linked to oil. By simply living in a building and buying food at a grocery, you already consume more oil than the earth can support.


So we should just give up hope and buy an SUV?? My lifestyle car free is sustainable, affordable and practical today but I can't control the future due to the fact that motorist are consuming an inordinate amount of the world's resources. Motorist like yourself don't care about our environment when it comes to motorcar usage but we do. It's too bad you don't like our opinion but that's what makes this forum different than all others.

Now, I didnt read through all your posts..... But to answer a few...

Environmental Education is a sort of experiential-based science class, we teach students about how natural systems work and attempt to instill a place-attachment with students so they care enough to care.

Nobody is car-free. That was my main intent with this original post. Yes, many of you can look outside and not see a car. But you get mail right? Delivered how? Oh, did you buy groceries? Hmm, how do those get to the store? This is one of the targets of Environmental Ed, to show students that groceries do NOT come from the grocery store, the typical product in the USA has travelled 1200 miles to get on the shelf, and the average USA meal has traveled around 9000 miles. So if you eat in the USA, you are not car-free.

There are billions of people in this world that are truly car-free. Their lives are based on sustinence, where ours are based on glutton. Even if you choose to seek the social bike-forums status of "car-free" my point here is that you are still not. If you truly cared, there would be many more lifestyle changes. I dont feel that many of you truly care, you are simply "car-free" for the social status that lends you at work, here on this forum, etc.

Most people do not truly understand the extent of their actions, and being "car-free" as defined in this forum is mostly a feel-good thing that only reduces a fraction of your personal impact on the environment.

Now, it is a VERY GOOD step, and we must keep working in the right direction, but please stop the BS about how you are so "ecologically sound" or "holistic" because you ride a bike. I ride a bike too. Big friggen deal. There is a lot more needed than just riding your bike to work.

Overall, I am not saying to stop riding a bike, I am just saying cut the crap, because in the big picture, being car-free is only the first step. And stop the car-bashing, it wont get you anywhere.

I am an American living in BC by the way...

Oh, and I enjoy people prying into me about "this forum is only in the US?"

Well, I know its not, but if you are using a computer and reading this forum, then you are most likely in the "developed world", i.e. The Problem.

After reading all the responses, I think many missed the point.....

I am not saying to stop riding a bike. I am saying it is not enough for some of the claims of "sustainability" that people are making.

Car-free is great. I would if I could. Just stop the claims of being "sustainable" because you are not. That doesnt mean dont try. Try hard, and then try harder. Do all that you can. I do as much as I can. But that still will never make me sustainable in this system.

To be sustainable, you would need to build your own house, use no electricity (even renewables are oil-based), grow your own food or with a very local-based group of people, and you probably wouldnt be able to ride a bike, unless of course it was steel. Carbon is petrol-based and Aluminium requires massive amounts of energy to refine. 5lbs of aluminium = 8 gallons of oil.

Keep up the good work you all, but stop the bragging. Get it?

Of all the silly....

People being carfree or carlite is a choice they make. Just as its a choice to be gridfree or gridlite. Some people feel as though the more people that push for oil independence, the more likely it will happen. If some of us can make it happen in our lives, to be carlite or free, it sets an example for other people to see and possibly follow.
Nothing changes over night, especially something as huge as dependence. But by hopeful, active and positive, we can hopefully steer things in the right direction.

But I think nedgoudy in post #6 said best.

Nobody is car-free. That was my main intent with this original post. Yes, many of you can look outside and not see a car. But you get mail right? Delivered how? Oh, did you buy groceries? Hmm, how do those get to the store? This is one of the targets of Environmental Ed, to show students that groceries do NOT come from the grocery store, the typical product in the USA has travelled 1200 miles to get on the shelf, and the average USA meal has traveled around 9000 miles. So if you eat in the USA, you are not car-free.

So what you're teaching your students is that only teacher-dictated definitions matter? Gimme a break. You don't have any special authority in this forum, your pet definition has no more weight than anyone else's.

I doubt anyone here was under any delusion that we never make use, directly or indirectly, of a motor vehicle of some type. Nevertheless many of us are car-free as we use the term, as it is commonly used by car-free advocates, and is frequently used. I hope you don't mislead your students this way.

This guy's even from BC. :pAnd he doesn't know it's not part of the USA.

Ive been mostly a lurker in this forum, because as an Environmental Educator, I find many of your discussions amusing. There are a lot of misconceptions around here as to what the impacts of your life are.

Well, I decided to chime in after I read a few of the responses in the last "sustainable" thread.

The real deal is that if you live in this country (USA) you will not be sustainable. End of story. I dont care how much you ride your bike, our infrastructure and lifestyle is irreversibly linked to oil. By simply living in a building and buying food at a grocery, you already consume more oil than the earth can support.

Sustainable is not a feel good thing that you are consuming less than the average american. Sustainable means that your lifestyle can be continued for generations without worry about running out of resources. This is simply not possible, even with the most meager lifestyles in the USA. Even "freegans" rely on the fat of the system to provide them with the excesses they find in the trash.

Why am I posting this? Well throughout bikeforums, I note that most people are fellow cyclists, just here to talk bikes. But in this forum, there seems to be a class system in place, where those that are "car-free" (which is a lie, nobody is car-free) are the "best" and the continually talk down to those that are "car-lite" as if they are in some way better people. And then there are those that think they are better because they left the USA, but they most likely did it on an airplane, an oil-based luxury that 90% of the world will never experience.

Im not challenging people to be more ecologically sound. I drive a car. I ride a bike too. Im just hoping that this caste system and claims of being "sustainable" will go away, because it just makes the people making those claims look ridiculous and petty.


Enough with the pranks, Crichton - go back to writing fiction/

After reading all the responses, I think many missed the point.....

Keep up the good work you all, but stop the bragging. Get it?
No, actually I did get the point. And I'm sure the rest of us did too. We really are intelligent enough to understand your posts. Your writing style is not so complex as to confuse us, even though we are a bunch of "Americans."

And I also think that when people share their experiences about commuting or their attempts at being carfree or carlite, they might actually be sharing what they've learned, and learning from other people.

What have we learned from you today?

Nobody is car-free. That was my main intent with this original post. Yes, many of you can look outside and not see a car. But you get mail right? Delivered how? Oh, did you buy groceries? Hmm, how do those get to the store? This is one of the targets of Environmental Ed, to show students that groceries do NOT come from the grocery store, the typical product in the USA has travelled 1200 miles to get on the shelf, and the average USA meal has traveled around 9000 miles. So if you eat in the USA, you are not car-free.

If you want to get REALLY technical about it, the groceries aren't delivered by cars, they are delivered by large trucks. Seems to me that you have a flawed definition of car free. My definition of car free means not owning a personal automobile. It does not mean to be independent of motor transit such as public transportation. That's just impractical and most car-freers I know have learned how to be MORE practical and MORE wise in their transportation choices. I don't know anyone that claims to be car free that also claims to be completely oil free. Some just reduce their dependence and more power to'em.

you are simply "car-free" for the social status that lends you at work, here on this forum, etc.

WoW! Now that's a new one on me. I guess we've finally made it, fellas. Being car free is now recognized as high society.

Most people do not truly understand the extent of their actions, and being "car-free" as defined in this forum is mostly a feel-good thing that only reduces a fraction of your personal impact on the environment.

Nope. Being car free is living a lifestyle that is not dependent on a personal motor vehicle for transportation. Apparently you haven't been able to achieve that. Too bad for you. It's really liberating.

Now, it is a VERY GOOD step, and we must keep working in the right direction, but please stop the BS about how you are so "ecologically sound" or "holistic" because you ride a bike. I ride a bike too. Big friggen deal. There is a lot more needed than just riding your bike to work.

Maybe..but it would certainly be helpful if more people rode their bike to work more often. Maybe you should try giving up your car and following suit. You may just learn something.

Overall, I am not saying to stop riding a bike, I am just saying cut the crap, because in the big picture, being car-free is only the first step. And stop the car-bashing, it wont get you anywhere.

I see your point. It is much more productive to bash those that live car-free.

I am an American living in BC by the way...

Yet another example of American pollution spilling over the Canadian border. It's just a matter of time now before we start reading of Canadian efforts to build a big wall ... **

But you get mail right? Delivered how?

My mail was delivered by someone using one of these. (http://www.pashley.co.uk/products/mailstar.html)

There are billions of people in this world that are truly car-free. Their lives are based on sustinence, where ours are based on glutton.

Are you kidding me? Or are you truly insane?

There is not one person on this planet that meets YOUR definition of "car-free"

Third world contries that have lives 'based on sustinence' recieve aid from other countries. They use tools made of metal and plastic that are manufactured. They use electricity, from plants that burn oil or coal (mostly), that require parts that are brought in from other areas and/or countries. Oh... and don't forget medicines trucked, flown, or shipped in from other areas.

The only reasonable definition of 'Car-free' would be a person who doesn't have a personal auto.

There is not one person on this planet that meets YOUR definition of "car-free"



Great point, but yea there are, only they're indigenous little tribes deep in the jungles of places like Mindanao and Borneo. Certainly not "billions" though, as he claims. Sheesh.

My mail was delivered by someone using one of these. (http://www.pashley.co.uk/products/mailstar.html)


owned.

The OP also seems to assume that the only reason to be car free is to help the environment.

This is very untrue.

I'm a vegetarian. Most people assume its because I think its wrong to kill animals for food, when in reality it is primarily for purely selfish reasons. It makes me healthier.

I want to be car free for the same reason. Using a car makes me less healthy.

I am working to be car free for me. I have not achieved it yet.

I don't think people are "bragging" about leading a more sustainable lifestyle. They are expressing pride in their accomplishments to encourage like minded people.

Great point, but yea there are, only they're indigenous little tribes deep in the jungles of places like Mindanao and Borneo. Certainly not "billions" though, as he claims. Sheesh.

Really? Go find ONE tribe that doesn't have a machete that someone has brought in from somewhere. I'll bet you can't do it.

I think the negative impact of the car, and the suburban sprawl that it implies, must be the elephant in Environmental Education's living room that no one is allowed to talk about for fear of upsetting their funding sources.

Really? Go find ONE tribe that doesn't have a machete that someone has brought in from somewhere. I'll bet you can't do it.

My friend Norman lived with such a tribe in Indonesia for a month. Literally everything they had was of their own making. I'll send him an email and ask the name if you'd like.

I see an Environmentalist with an Automobile and a Complex about it. :)

The only reasonable definition of 'Car-free' would be a person who doesn't have a personal auto.

Yep. And, as we have well established in some of the threads in this forum, being "car free" isn't the be-all and end-all, especially since a car free person may use motor-boats, airplanes, taxis, rental cars, and other motor vehicles as much as the next person.

My friend Norman lived with such a tribe in Indonesia for a month. Literally everything they had was of their own making. I'll send him an email and ask the name if you'd like.

Ask him. I have no problem believing that ALMOST everything they used they made themselves, but I find it nearly impossible to believe that they use NOTHING from outside their little corner of the world.

Ask him. I have no problem believing that ALMOST everything they used they made themselves, but I find it nearly impossible to believe that they use NOTHING from outside their little corner of the world.

That would be an overly strict definition of sustainable. If they have one or two goods produced from outside, it simply means they are in contact with the rest of the world, not that they are depleting the planet's resources.

Ask him. I have no problem believing that ALMOST everything they used they made themselves, but I find it nearly impossible to believe that they use NOTHING from outside their little corner of the world.

I was listening to Jared Diamond on the radio last night and he was talking about a stoneage tech tribe in Indonesia that finally caved in the last couple decades to using metal tools. But they still know how to make stone axes if the supply of metal ones runs out!

That would be an overly strict definition of sustainable. If they have one or two goods produced from outside, it simply means they are in contact with the rest of the world, not that they are depleting the planet's resources.

Yes, but that was essentially the definition that the OP was using... And my comment was that I didn't belive ANYBODY met it.

Hi Velo:

Like I said, you must have expected the negative repsonse before you even posted; I mean it's a forum for people who've given up their cars, or who are thinking about it.

I do think you're being too hard on people. You are correct in asserting that none of us is truly car free; in modern cities, we simply can't do without delivery trucks, busses, fire trucks, etc. We need to move big, heavy stuff around. But we don't all need our own personal car. I don't imagine for a second that my small act of ditching the car will by itself save the planet, but it does give me a certain small satisfaction that I've at least cut my own CO2 emissions by over half, and it allows me to be more credible when I talk to kids about the environment in my science classes. I don't think I'm superior to others just because I ride my bike -I'm intelligent enough to understand that the bike itself is a product of the industrial infrastructure that's causing so much trouble. But it's a start, and I don't need to feel ashamed of it. And, in reading most of the posts, I don't see the huge, nauseating waves of smug self-satisfaction that you seem to see. People are doing what they can, and they come to this forum share their weirdness. Yes, a few people get smug. But most don't, and it's not fair for you to paint everyone with the same haughty brush, you dirty car-driver. (But, if you posted just to stir the pot, you've done a wonderful job. I've had fun reading this thread... :) )

OMFG people. You're not just feeding the troll, you're laying out a buffet. Why bother?

Sigh.

I think the OP is confusing car free and oil free

I think the OP is confusing car free and oil free

It seems like a lot of arguments are just over a matter of semantics.

Ask him. I have no problem believing that ALMOST everything they used they made themselves, but I find it nearly impossible to believe that they use NOTHING from outside their little corner of the world.

Email sent. He's usually pretty quick about replying, but he lives in Bangkok, which means he's likely asleep right now.

And I don't think it's impossible. From what he told me, they weren't exactly on the edge of a city. They were deep in the jungles of Borneo, and he needed a guide to even find them.

Some degree of industrialization is sustainable. there's no reason we can't have bicycles in the future.

There are a few main things which are not sustainable....feeding 6 billion people using massive petrochemical input, polluting the planet with persisting toxins, paving over farmland and depleting topsoil, and maintaining our level of energy expenditure.

What would be sustainable?
"Organic" agriculture and a mostly vegetarian diet. I don't know how many people the earth can sustainably feed, but it's a lot. Unfortunately, it's probably also a lot less than 6 billion.
Reliance on sustainable energy, using far less energy than we do today. Since we squander huge amounts of energy on trivial activities we can do that. Especially with a smaller population.
Elimination of persisting toxins dioxin, PCBs, etc.
Population reduction through various means...voluntary, incentives, war, disease, famine. Partly we'll choose the methods, and partly they will be visited upon us.

I have no illusion that I am "sustainable", but I figure not driving my car as much as possible does a great deal to lessen my impact on the world. That is good enough for me. If more people refrained from drivng their car for even a few of their trips it would add up fast.

To be sustainable, you would need to build your own house, use no electricity (even renewables are oil-based), grow your own food or with a very local-based group of people, and you probably wouldnt be able to ride a bike, unless of course it was steel. Carbon is petrol-based and Aluminium requires massive amounts of energy to refine. 5lbs of aluminium = 8 gallons of oil.


Hmmm... ok, so I build my own house but with what? Oh, tools. If I buy those tools that have traveled x miles in a truck using gas/oil... ok, you see. So, I build my own tools to build my own house? Lets see, I need steel. That means a smelting plant of some kind... I could build a primitive one...

...ok, this is plain silly... I need to build a fire which means burning trees so I can make my own tools to build my own house so I can say I'm sustainable??? I think you're saying give up...

<brag>I am not sustainable. I am sustainably minded. I am slowly coming to my senses and believing in the vision that every little bit helps. Every bike ride to work is 0.8 gallons of gas not burned. Every trip to the store saves 0.1 gallons. I help. I try. I don't nay-say anyone else who puts forth effort and shows motivation.</brag>

<definition>Sustainability is a state of mind and way of life. Incorporating sustainability principles, concepts and approaches in both formal and informal education processes will help institutionalize these concepts and encourage their widespread adoption. This section offers many resources and organizations that promote sustainability education.</definition>

...wow... and I did all this on a computer... I feel like I should be carving into a stone tablet with my fingernails...

B.H.