Sustainable development is not unsustainable

By Dr Peter Courtland Agre M.D.

With apologies to English teachers everywhere, my position to this statement is the double negative—"sustainability is not unsustainable." But this may be true only if we in America get a firm national grip on reality. I focus my argument on America as it is the world's biggest economy and (with China) its worst polluter.

Our situation is indeed exceedingly grim—increasing release of toxins into the environment, energy gluttony and the appearance of epidemic obesity. Compounding these problems is the nearly total lack of thrift among Americans whose uncontrollable consumerism is sufficient to support multiple shopping channels on the television 24 x 7 x 365 at a time of unprecedented debt.

To have the world's biggest economy is irrelevant if we squander our wealth on fluff. Popular television advertising revenues alone could sustain significant educational reform in the US. Consider for example that one second of advertising during the Super Bowl retails for $100,000—twice the annual salary of a beginning schoolteacher. The wisdom behind the rising economy in China must be questioned, since they now have 3% of the world's paved roadways but 21% of the world's highway fatalities. If this truly reflects giving the public what it wants, we are most certainly doomed.

Rather than arguing that science will save us simply through new inventions, let me suggest that it is wisdom from our history that may save us.

Altering behaviour is exceedingly difficult but not impossible. Before the arrival of the Europeans, North America was home to the Native American Indians. Their culture had remarkable beauty but was technologically primitive. Native Americans lacked the wheel, had no units to measure time shorter than one day, and often faced starvation in winter. But in terms of wisdom, they had remarkable ability. Important tribal decisions were only made after the elders considered consequences their decisions would have seven generations in the future.

The concept of "Seven Generation Sustainability" was known to our Founding Fathers. If we consider the mindset of America's leaders seven generations back, it would include wisdom not commonly articulated by many of our leaders today. Moreover, is it possible that the Founding Fathers' wisdom is still current? Let us revisit some pearls dropped by two of our Founding Fathers who also happen to have been scientists—Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson.
Franklin said, "A penny saved is a penny earned" and "Poor man, said I, you pay too much for your whistle." Would our current Federal Reserve Chairman question Franklin's thoughts on thrift? "Never spend your money before you have earned it": excellent advice from Jefferson, but a trait that he did not adhere to personally. While Franklin was not well known for his positions on natural conservation, his wit was poignant: "When the well's dry, we know the worth of water." Jefferson was more outspoken on issues of the natural world. "There is not a sprig of grass that shoots uninteresting to me."

Wisdom and political mobilisation of the sort achieved by the Founding Fathers are needed today to bring about sustainable development. Given proper investment, scientific development of renewable and environmentally friendly sources of energy is likely. Design of modern, livable cities with expedient forms of public transportation is feasible. But the determining factor is likely to be our national will. Are we willing to do the necessary belt-tightening? Do we want this enough to make the sacrifices necessary?

Achievement of sustainability can only occur if the public demands it. My view is that a populist revolt for sustainability must be initiated, and it must include the young. Jefferson claimed that "Every generation needs a new revolution," and Franklin that "Many people die at 25 but are not buried until they are 75." Our younger generation will determine if the right decisions are undertaken by becoming engaged in the most important issue of our time.

Specifically, we must place greater emphasis on what can be done currently and less on wishful thinking about miracle inventions that are allegedly imminent. Ranks of the progressives are consumed with internecine conflict about use of coal, our most plentiful energy source, for the generation of electricity. Let us not delay the opportunity, both in the US and in China, to convert from traditional coal-burning technology to modern integrated coal-gasification power with dramatic reductions in greenhouse gases because perfection has not yet been achieved.
We Nobel laureates are often congratulated on being brilliant and important (in truth we like it), but this needs to be reconsidered from a different perspective. As President Kennedy stated at the White House dinner for 49 Nobel laureates in May 1962, "I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent, of human knowledge, that has ever been gathered together at the White House, with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone."

This underscores Jefferson's view that "One man with courage is a majority." A call for national activism is necessary. If Franklin and Jefferson were here today, I suspect that they would tell us that the future of society and the future of the planet seven generations from now will most certainly reflect the decisions made by today's leaders and the actions of our younger generation.
While Barack Obama may not be a modern-day Thomas Jefferson, he demonstrated remarkable wisdom by appointing Nobel laureate Steven Chu as secretary of energy. Chu is a hero to many young scientists and environmentalists in the United States, and as a first-generation Chinese-American, he is celebrated widely in China. At last we may have national leadership that can pull us up to our full stature. I choose to be optimistic.