Your "sustainability" is not necessarily my "sustainability"

Dear Blog,

I don't really want to start defining the word sustainability, but maybe I have to.

The last two weeks I've heard Doris Fialla and Richard Quest talking about sustainability.
But Richard sounded like he was talking about "a permanent, long standing Solution". Doris Fialla comes from the other side of the fence (well, almost), and I think I heard behind her statement "corporate sustainability". Well, I think about "ecological sustainability", about "social sustainability". Longevity of solutions is, of course, only one aspect of this paradigm. But, for me sustainability is a state to be attained, taking into consideration ecological, climatic, social factors, and THEN the solution, be it economical, informal, social, or biological.

So, are we really speaking about different things ?

I then remind myself of Alvin Tofflers book, which my father insisted I read (this was a long time ago). I don't recall the name of the book, but it was a critique of technological commerce.
In a nutshell, light bulbs at that time, according to Toffler, were engineered to have a limited life time. Now, everyone would agree, nowadays, that this is NOT a sustainable solution. (Twenty years later, came the scandalous printers for P.C.'s, which were intentionally programmed to
only work for what, one year, two maybe. Some computer magazine I read uncovered this practise. Also, not sustainable.

Now, what is it ? The idea of longevity was negated. But, the ecological and climate consequences are apparent to anyone who's listened to Al Gore. Wasting resources is now a no-no. Especially if the material is burned. (In Switzerland there are recycling projects where the toxic materials are taken out, but that's another story.) Sustainable development is something which integrates all aspects of our socio-biosphere aiming for acceptable solutions. That's how I see it.

Doris Fialla talking about sustainability mentioned the energy saving architecture. I happen to know that the CEO of this sector is a Swiss Liberal, like Ms. Fialla. His association, organizes the energy saving, solar passive, Minergie building construction. These buildings can be so well isolated and constructed, that a minimum of energy is necessary to maintain the building climate (that is, almost no extra heating is necessary, depending on the degree of energy saving). Who can be against this concept ?

Some people still use oil or natural gas others use solar energy for this rest energy for heating. After all, even in times of global warming, some days are really cold here in Switzerland. Nowadays, it is not considered wise to install solar energy panels or collectors, if the house loses energy (through the windows, for example).

My friends at the Swiss Solar Energy Society have been a great inspiration for me. I've learned so much there. It's funny. We started as a pure solar energy association, and slowly, slowly other concepts have been integrated in our way of seeing things. Last years we even contributed to the Swiss Climate Charta, but that's another story. I guess "sustainable development" sums up this conglomerate of solar, renewable, alternative solutions, climate, impact on society.

Definitions always bore me, as you probably think too. But it has to be said once. Before I start with more subjects on this blog. Uff !