admin answers:

Basically a sustainable future would be one in which the majority of resources and energy sources we utilize are renewable, coupled with disposing wisely of waste (and reducing the amount of waste made in the first place), managing land responsibly and eliminating air, water and soil pollution. Renewable forms of energy include bio-fuel, solar, wind, hydro, and some would argue things like methane harvesting, hydrogen, and nuclear. This would include phasing out and ultimately getting rid of fossil fuels, which all pollute when “burned” to make energy (admittedly some far less than others) and are finite (i.e. Not renewable; once they are gone, they are gone). The mining/drilling to harvest them has a significant environmental impact as well. Renewable resources would include plant based plastic products & fabrics, fast-growing tree varieties that don’t deplete the soil, utilizing materials that can easily and cheaply be recycled again and again, etc. Better waste management also goes back to recycling and reusing (for instance millions of items are thrown out every year that could be donated to thrift stores, homeless shelters, etc) but also reducing the amount of unnecessary waste by producing products that are more durable, with less packaging that can be recycled when they are no longer able to be repaired.
Problems with achieving more sustainability include the following:
1.Resistance to phasing out fossil fuels – many of the economic and political powers of our time are involved with the fossil fuel industries in some way and are afraid of losing their fortunes. They fight to keep regulations weak and ultimately to work against renewable energy sources being researched, refined and widely implemented. The average American also does not want to pay more for alternative fuel or for a vehicle that will use it, even if the long term savings make up for (increased mpg, longevity, etc). Thus there is not a push on the government or large corporations to research alternative energy or improve mass transit (as it is in Europe).
2.Poor land management – for instance reducing meat consumption would reduce the needed amount of farm animals, reducing the demand on the grain supply. The grain we feed animals for meat would feed thousands of times more people than it does animals. We also need to think about WHAT we plant for renewable resources – for instance using all corn for ethanol and bio-fuels has jacked up the price of corn for countries that use it for food and has severely decreased bio-diversity (having a wide variety of crops), which is very bad for the soil. It has other economic factors as well. We also have to consider the way we farm – are we polluting the soil and rivers with runoff?
3.Laziness and apathy – People don’t want to do anything that takes extra time, money or effort; they don’t want to recycle, read labels, lobby companies and politicians for greener products and policies, pay a little more for organic or for an electric vehicle, etc. People believe the convenient lies some people weave about global warming being a face and pollution not being a “big deal” (or the often heard idea “I’ll be dead when it’s really bad so it doesn’t matter” or “one person can’t make a difference”) because then they don’t feel bad about themselves or their choices.
4.Lack of government initiative to “green” the country, even on a local level – many municipalities, and the state and federal governments as a whole, don’t put the effort into promoting green policies, renewable energy and conservation necessary to fuel real change. In the same way many Americans did not want racial equality but the government passed the Civil Right Act to force it, the government needs to step in and legislate green concerns. The conservative body always decries the government being involved in people’s lives, but frankly many people are selfish and uninformed and won’t “do the right thing” unless forced. We can’t sit back and do nothing about a huge problem just people don’t want to be told what to do like spoiled teenagers. Because the government doesn’t push harder regulations, or offer better incentives, the corporate sector is not willing to invest in utilizing or developing green technology, keeping it expensive and not easily accessible.

admin answers:

>How could world energy consumption be more evenly distributed?

Make the poor areas more prosperous! Stop thinking of energy consumption as a driver, it is a consequence.

>But how exactly will me turning off the lights when I leave give third world countries energy

It would have almost zero effect. But what about if everyone used 10% less power and sent the money that would have gone to the power company to some organization working on providing clean drinking water to third world countries?

>should more developed countries step in, if so how?

They have! Particularly the US has spent a lot of money over a long period of time. With very little to show for it.

The problem is it is extremely difficult to “give” prosperity to someone in the long run. This is true of both individuals and countries. This seems to be human nature.

The key seems to be changing the culture/mindset of the recipients to make improvements sustainable. But doing so is not only difficult, it’s politically incorrect.