Jamie Koerner

    The more important issue is not a global centerpiece, but a simple answer.
     The biggest threat to the environment and future of nations is not global warming or depletion of the oil supply. The bigger problem with society today is consumption.
     On a basic level, the world's population, especially the developed nations, consume too much. And the solution has a basic answer – sustainability.
     However, there are many millions of people living unsustainable lives that it may take a global crisis, like the depletion of oil, to jumpstart a mass change in mentality.
     There are some parts of society that aren't quite right – selling our outdated, hazardous waste to other countries - under the counter; dumping waste into the ocean; filling up landfill after landfill; overuse of material for protective wrapping on products; driving and commuting long distances for unsubstantial reasons; breaking down hazardous products like car batteries used in the U.S. in other countries; throwing away food; using large amounts of hazardous chemicals over the soil, which filter through to the groundwater; wasting water; not recycling and reusing products; building homes larger than necessary and consumption of any material or good that is beyond human necessity.
     The best solution now, which is very hard to spread the message, is to individualize your needs and decide what can go, or stay.
     If there are ways to make a home more efficient, like sealing windows; or parts of the day that resources can be cut, like taking short showers; or food that can be grown at home, like vegetable gardens; or items that can be reused in the home, like twist-ties; it would aid the sustainability concept.
     Localization of goods, rather than continued increases in imports to the U.S., is important when considering sustainability.
     Another way to localize needs is to use local markets and co-ops, or support local restaurants.
     It's hard to always track where materials were initially generated, even for locally-made products, but any dollars going back into a community build it up from the core and allow slack in government monies to have potential for use in other areas – like restoring an old building for community use.
     The hardest part of change is making people realize that no one else is going to do it for them.
     Really, if each person took on one task in their community and lead a recycling movement or a major community improvement or the start of a local Fourth of July celebration, oh..., things in a community would occur in one generation that would improve the well-being and longevity of a city, town or nation and could weld tradition and culture to everyday life.
     In my opinion, a life lived in a sustainable fashion, grounded on the products of the Earth or simply eliminating the unnecessary parts of life and consuming less, would be a richer life than one that consumes products of an unknown origin.
     Imagine, if everything used and consumed had a personal or local impact how much more enjoyable and savored life could be.
     And in the words of a friend, world traveler and acute observer, the solution remains an enigma.