This week, advisory board member Sara Sweeney talks a little bit more about the sustainable vs. green debate.  You can find out more about Sara on the B2S team page.

A few weeks ago, James asked a great question on this blog about Sustainable vs. Green. The question stemmed from the fact that terms often become labels and are tossed around perhaps without much thought to the actual meaning. With respect to sustainable vs green, James asked “…is it important that we begin to define terms more clearly?  What is the difference between "green" and "sustainable"?  Is there one?  Should there be one?” He also asked “…how do we implement them in such a way that the general public will also understand?”

The resulting comments showed a great cross-section of how the terms are being used (whether real or perceived), and I recommend reading all of them. I wanted to follow up on my comment to the post, as well as my thoughts on this subject, in this post, my regular monthly contribution to the B2S blog.  

Back to Basics

In crafting my original comment to James’ questions, I had gone back to Webster’s Dictionary, 9^th ed., and looked up green and sustain, the root of sustainability. I wanted to go back and start at the very beginning, so to speak. I was interested in what I learned as a result, specifically that not only is green a noun (a color for ex.), it also is a verb, meaning “to become green, to make green.” Webster’s also listed two cross-reference verbs: Rejuvenate and Revitalize. If my understanding is correct, then green when used as “to become green,” or “to make green” could be used in place of these verbs, and vice-versa. The word green –as both a noun and a verb, has been around a long time too, in use since roughly the 12^th century. 

The word sustain has also been around a long time, since the 13^th century. It’s a verb meaning “to give support or relief to; to supply with sustenance; keep up, prolong…” and etc. The word sustainable is really an adjective of sustain, and so in reality describes something which gives support or relief to. 

“Only X is Sustainable! Y is Not!”

In thinking further about these questions the past few weeks, I also feel we need to be mindful of how we use the terms, and in what context. I say this because there exists the danger that we involved in any way with environmental responsibility could hijack either term to mean only what we want it to mean, versus what it truly means. So many factors come into play when talking about sustainability–political, social, economic and environmental. Mark Lorie said it best in his poignant comment to James original question:

Most people are wrong about what sustainable means and how it should be pursued. Most rigorous writings on this, starting with the Bruntland commission and scholars like Herman Daly, are clear that sustainability consists of three primary elements--social, economic, and environmental. Many environmentalists tend to forget the first two and talk about sustainability as being "zero waste" or "not extracting a resource faster than it is regenerated." Nonsense. The three elements go hand in hand. If society decides to improve wealth, living standards and social conditions by using a non-renewable energy source, as we have done for centuries, it is not automatically "unsustainable" in the true definition of the term. To make this a sustainable practice, society must eventually invest some of the generated wealth in finding alternatives that will allow future generations to have the same choices about living standards and social conditions as we have. Those investments can be through R&D, educating people to do the work etc. The consumed natural capital has to be replaced with various forms of social or economic capital so that we don't preclude future generations choices.

He is absolutely correct, and his comment gets to the crux of why we need to be mindful of the use of the words. To further illustrate the point, here’s an excerpt from a guest post I did for Chris Hill’s Construction Law Musings blog last week:  

“…Many feel that coal generated power is unsustainable. Mining coal can cause massive environmental destruction, and burning it emits toxins into the air, from CO2 to mercury, and is accused of being the primary cause of a changing climate, to name a few reasons. To others, such as those who work in coal rich areas, coal represents sustainability. Sustainability of their lives, of their families lives. Upper management and corporate heads of the coal industry aside, to a miner, or anyone that works in the dredges of the coal industry, the loss of the industry is potentially a threat to their sustainability. Yes, there may be “Green Jobs” available, and yes, perhaps these jobs offer a healthier work environment than what a mine offers. But unless the jobs are a lateral or advanced move career wise, and not a demotion per-say, I can understand the concern [those working in the coal-mining industry may have]…” 

Although many may indeed feel that coal generated power is unsustainable, in the true sense of the word sustain, and when viewed in context with social, economic and environmental factors, use of coal may very well be sustainable.  

Sustainable and Green

There are many sides to the definition of just what sustainable and green mean and we cannot look at sustainability and green only with respect to the environmental concerns, just as we cannot look at them only with respect to social concerns. They must be viewed in balance with the three elements of social, economic and environmental. 

I ended my original comment to James’ questions stating that “…[I feel] we can use green and sustainable interchangeably as verbs, nouns and adjectives, to describe our efforts…” and I think we can. There are really no better two words to describe the changes taking place culturally, socially, economically, politically and more. Each word is succinct and easily understandable, and in reality, can be used interchangeably. And as long as we are all balanced and fair in our use of the words, instead of using it to claim the sustainability of one ‘thing’ and decry the un-sustainability of another ‘thing,’ we will stick true to the meaning of the words, as well as finding common ground and a way forward as a whole.