Don't tell the legislators. They might arrest these "conspirators."
"Most of the definitions have the common thread of being concerned about future
generations, not just our own,"I can't help but wonder why advocates
of sustainability are never concerned about the unsustainability of passing on
the costs of sustainability to future generations.
What costs? Sure, cleaner energy and greener, high-performance buildings cost
more up front, but look at the long term benefits and cost savings! Wind,
solar, and geothermal costs are lock-in over the life of the projects, similar
to hydro-power... hydro was once the most expensive energy source, but for many
utilities, it is the least expensive in their portfolios as gas and coal prices
have increased.The use of coal may appear cheap, but it spews
mercury, carbon dioxide, and other pollutants that others pay, usually future
generations. The mercury problem in Utah is largely attributed to the
coal-fired power plants and old gold and silver mines from genrations ago. And
yet, WE are paying the price for those pollutants today with restrictions on
fishing and bird hunting.And nuclear is the least sustainable...
we're still paying for the waste management of nuclear fuel rods used by our
grandparents' generation. And the waste we create today will be paid for by our
many future generations to come. If you believe wind power or the
use of a super energy efficient building will "cost" more for your children,
you're sadly mistaken.