Sustainable: What does it Really Mean?

Sustainable: Able to be maintained at a certain level; able to be used without being completely used up or destroyed. — Standard dictionary definition

“Populations in a given politically or geographically defined area become truly sustainable…  (1) When living within the limits of that area’s renewable resources, both in inputs (energy and materials) and outputs (food, goods, etc., and the area’s capacity to absorb damage and regenerate).  (2) When such populations purchase or trade only with environmentally responsible sources, for those necessities unavailable locally.  (3) When population density and manner of living support the health and well-being of all species and habitats, for the present generation, and all those to come.”
— www.culturechange.org

“Somewhere along the way, environmentalism stopped being about protecting the Earth, and it became about ‘sustainability,’ which is about continuing this culture that’s killing the planet.”  — Derrick Jensen, noted author

The one thing that can be said with certainty in the current usage of the term “sustainable” or “sustainability” is that there is not much agreement as to its meaning. Its ubiquitous use in almost any context has rendered it almost meaningless. Such is the power of advertising.

A prime example of this at the local level are the full-page ads in local newspapers featuring prominent wine industry families, grape growers and vintners, claiming that their enterprise is sustainable, implying that their farming methods and the end product it produces are parts of a process that is endlessly renewable. But is this so?

Sonoma County is amenable to grape growing, especially for wine varietals because of its climate and resulting soil, but then what happens if and when that climate changes? Every reasonably intelligent and informed person knows that we are at the dawn of a global warming that will bring about climate changes. Only the delusional or purposely cynical deny this reality. So given this truth the question is: How will Sonoma and its other North Bay county neighbors be affected vis-à-vis wine grape growing and wine producing?

There is enough historical evidence that shows when the Earth’s climate changes, its geography, commonly referred to as the environment, in particular its land, sea and air also change, including plant and animal life and in turn affecting humans and their industries. What these changes will be are hard to predict, but with the inevitable changes in climate and weather patterns what was once so suitable to a specific crop might well no longer be the case. What we do know about Earth climate changes is that where once there were swamps or tropical landscapes there are now deserts. Only one example of profound geographic changes over time, but as our part of the world heats up, and rather quickly by all estimations, the land here may no longer be so amenable to wine grape growing. So perhaps the claim of sustainability by that industry is unfounded, unless they mean sustainable only for some decades to come, which on its face is contrary to the definition.

Economic sustainability

Then there’s sustainability in an economic context. Presently Sonoma County’s economy is both dependent on and intertwined with wine grape farming and wine production, but who can say this will always be so? Prior to wine grapes, Sonoma agriculture centered on other crops including apples, olives, nuts and berries. Wine grapes are the cash crop now, but time and circumstance might change that as before.

Local economies like national economies are subject to change. This we know. As Sonoma and Northern California become more and more tourist destinations it will enjoy that tourist-dependent economy. Sonoma is assuredly a destination, but in our increasingly shrinking world of times and distances it isn’t the only one. US economies have run boom and bust over the decades and there’s no reason to think that won’t continue. If there’s any certainty it’s that economies fluctuate, and what is now Sonoma’s economic mainstay may not be tomorrow’s.

The water factor

The biggest part of the equation left out by the wine industry’s claim of sustainability is the ongoing availability of water. Evidence abounds that, as the climate changes so will the mountain snow packs, rainfall and groundwater intertwined with it. Rivers and lakes dry out, either from natural causes, human overuse or both. There’s no reason to believe it won’t (and isn’t) happening here.

Climate change is impacting our water, land and air. One example is the ocean’s depletion of fish. Given these profound changes to come to the Earth’s plant and animal (that’s us) life any claim of sustainability by any human enterprise cannot be but disregarded as fatuous and a flat out fabrication.

In California we are now living in the time of less water. This could be a temporary condition or it could be the new normal as Governor Brown suggested. All indications point to the latter as we move further along and deeper into climate change and global warming especially here on the West Coast. In this time of water scarcity we must make intelligent and just decisions as to its use and distribution.

Potable water is a finite resource. It has always been thus, and now more than ever before in human history we must come to grips with this stark reality.

The first priority in regulating water use must be its use for human health and welfare. It is a public trust. No life exists for very long without it – the ultimate failure in sustainability. As water is essential for human existence should it be a commodity available only for those who can afford it or who can access it? Is it something that should be privately owned by certain individuals or entities and denied to others, or should we consider water a necessity for our common survival as it most definitely is?

One startling irony in California is that in the midst of our dealing with the ramifications of the drought the sale of water to corporations for global distribution, the Nestle Company being only one example, continues apace. The state is about to slap mandatory water cutback regulations on its citizenry, and all the while export it for some entity’s profit? If there’s a shred of sense in this it needs to be pointed out to me.

As the climate changes and potable water becomes more scarce we (humans) who have relegated to ourselves dominion over all of nature will have to answer this and other questions if we want to talk about what is truly sustainable in our profoundly shifting natural and societal world. We cannot dodge this for long as time is catching up with us, and claims that we can have it all – economic, environmental and social stability and equanimity – are simply a pipe dream not based in any reality.