John Gardner: Sustainability is radical

It was one of those unexpected moments when you hear something that totally changes the way you look at things.

The event was a meeting of the Treasure Valley Chamber of Commerce Energy Policy Task Force (and yes, it was almost as dull as it sounds) and the speaker was a well-known and locally respected energy expert. "What most people don't understand," he said, "is that when you extract a barrel of oil from the ground, you've just created wealth!"

Economists would agree with that statement. In fact, a large portion of the wealth we have created in human society has come from the exploitation of fossil resources and development of previously unoccupied land, both of which are finite. Whether through the coal we use to generate electricity or the tracts of land we develop into office buildings and houses, much of the wealth of our nation has been created through extraction and expansion.

In that light, I think it odd that one of the most commonly discussed concepts of the past few years is also one of the least controversial.

I'm talking about "sustainability." Regardless of which cable news show you watch, it's hard to argue against it. Sustainability has sort of an apple pie feel to it. Who could oppose it, really? Especially when it's expressed as the U.N. commission on economic development did in 1987: sustainable development "meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." I mean, once you play the "future generations" card, what else is there?

But seen through the lens of growth-based economic development, sustainability looks a little different - and more than a little scary. In a nation with a growing population (as is ours) current economic theory argues that the economy needs to continuously expand if for no other reason than to accommodate an ever-growing work force. Each member of this work force is pursuing his or her version of the American Dream.

And here is the conflict: How can we continue on our path of economic growth and embrace sustainability at the same time? The answer is we cannot. Sustainability requires a fundamental rethinking of the basis of our economy; it requires a new way of creating wealth because our current practice of extraction and expansion is, well, unsustainable.

In the midst of the "Great Recession" we have opportunities as well as challenges. As we grapple with the challenge of getting the economy back on track, we have an opportunity to re-think how it will expand again. We don't have to get back on the same track that led us to this train wreck because, let's face it, we all know that there's just a series of train wrecks awaiting us and our children in that direction.

Sustainability is not incompatible with economic growth, but it is inconsistent with the kind of growth and consumption we experienced over the past 20 years. An economy that's truly sustainable will be one that relies on renewable resources and one in which everyone who is willing to work can make a living and, perhaps, not as many people will make a killing.

As we emerge from the first decade of the 21st century, I fear that our hunger for economic growth and expansion at any cost coupled with the rough-and-tumble, sound-bite-laden tumult that passes for political discourse in this country may cause us to reject the very concept of sustainability as too radical, something we simply cannot afford to do.

It's true, sustainability is a radical concept, one that rightfully takes its place in the long line of radical ideas that have shaped the course of human history but are now accepted as common sense.

Democracy is a great example, as is the concept that all people are created equal - whether they walk the Earth today or a hundred years from now.

John Gardner is Boise State's associate vice president for energy research, policy and campus sustainability.