Green Options

Now that the proverbial dust has begun to settle from my recent discussion with Caroline Savery on defining “sustainability,” I have been reflecting on it all with great appreciation and pleasure.

The main realization I have come to is that Caroline and I seem to be focusing on different audiences in most of our posts. (Caroline, if you are reading this, please feel free to correct me if you disagree with what I say here!) That is, most of my posts feel more appropriate for and geared towards “beginners” in sustainable living…those folks who are taking their first steps on the path of Green. Having done a lot with various methods of sustainable living and environmentalism (as an “-ism”) so far, I have felt called to use my experiences along the path to help others with little or no experience.

At the same time, and by doing so, I have been most dedicated to celebrating all the things in nature that I believe are sacred…and that so often get overlooked, even by us environmentalists! It is easy to forget about the sacred things in nature that are all around us, wherever we happen to be, and it has been a joy for me to sing their praises with all my heart and voice.

Caroline seems to be focused a bit more on speaking directly to the more experienced members of the sustainability crowd. Her Sust Enable experience/experiment of living off the grid, in my mind at least, is largely something that people would look to in order to take the next step in adapting to a more completely sustainable lifestyle. These sorts of folks would be more acclimated to that lifestyle already and so ready to, and likely more successful with, inching closer to being 100% sustainable. (Of course, much of what Caroline shared is also relevant for beginners in green living, just as what I have written is useful for anyone at any stage. But her sort of life off the grid as a complete life experience seems to me more appropriate for the seasoned sustainabillies.)

From what you write, Caroline, it is clear that at this point your heart (or mind–or both!) compelled you to try the 100% sustainable, Sust Enable “experiment.” And you learned and shared many good things with us–mistakes not to try again and great methods for living sustainably. That is wonderful, and it is surely going to stick with you; after all, we learn best not only from direct experience but, I believe, from “mistakes” as well.

Obviously you are not disregarding changes others make, nor are you screaming at them from your soapbox on high to go all the way. My concern, though, is that focusing on such a 100% approach on a larger scale would turn off people to environmentalism. As I said before, there has to be an equal (even greater?) focus on small steps, an equal (even greater?) celebration of little changes, in order to help keep the mood positive and morale high–and the changes occurring, the momentum building, the tide turning!

I think we are both on the same vibe in the end. Heck, we both feel urgently the need to do good for the Earth and to help others do so as well. We both share a desire to see positive things happen and to serve our fellow beings by using all our “tools” to help build a better, safer community. I think we differ mostly in terms of focus and emphasis in the nature of what we write.

I believe, then, we need both the point and the counterpoint within the environmental movement itself. Die-hard Socratic that I am, I believe we need to question all things—in particular the accepted “norms”…and more especially the things we think are “right,” “true,” etc. This self-reflective, synergistic approach to environmentalism will keep it green and thriving, a sustainable force driven by the symbiosis of its dynamic elements.

I honor the sense of urgency you express in your post, Caroline, especially because of the fact that you are not feeling it and then getting frozen by fear with a sense of not knowing what to do. Nor are you simply screaming and dictating what others should do without getting active yourself. Instead, you are striving to realize 100% sustainability now, in your own life–and then sharing your experiences along the way. That is priceless, and we need more people with that much dedication…no matter how far they take sustainable living.

But here is my reaction to what you have written. One danger of such an approach to sustainability is that it presents an all-or-nothing, zero-sum scenario in which only large (”extreme”) measures are valued or presented as viable options. If that becomes the predominant model of sustainable living–and of environmentalism–then it has the strong likelihood of turning off many folks who are not entirely convinced or who do not share your sense of urgency.

Plus, it seems to present a sort of cold-turkey path to going sustainable: Drop everything you know in your life so far and live “green”…or else! To expect the majority in modern society, which is going more towards ease and convenience along the Western paradigm than anything else (just think of China, for example), to do this sort of sudden break with habit is just not realistic.

My feeling is that the most effective, realistic approach to sustainable living for the broadest demographic of individuals is a slower approach–starting at, say, 40% sustainability and then increasing at a pace that is comfortable but not indulging complacency–with or without a goal of reaching 100%.