Sharon Bloyd-Peshkin's View Of Sustainability

Sustainability is a realistic objective as long as people are educated about the science and the problem in western values. People see sustainability as a non-realistic objective. The thought of sustainability in our lives, worried us. People don’t realize that sustainability doesn’t always refer to major changes in our lives. Sustainability can consists of doing little things that would impact the environment in vary ways.
A journalism professor and freelance writer, Sharon Bloyd-Peshkin believes and propose that, sustainability should be achieve through the move to “Heirloom design.” Heirloom design, calls for products that are durable, upgradable, and repairable, which would reduce the quantity of the energy required for production and distribution.
When people were buying things, they were buying things that were made by Americans workers.” Says Lizabeth Cohen, a chair of the history department at Harvard University and the author of the, Politics of Mass Consumption in Postwar America. Bloyd implies that, changing the way people consume things, and adapting them to buy things that are heirloom design wise will lower the amount of money that is being imported each year to China and other countries; as well as it will lower the way things are being made. The amount of money that’s being spend for machine will increase because these no will longer be available, also increasing the amount of money that’s being imported to other countries because, we will no longer be sending money. Besides the fact that this would not only benefit the government, it would also benefit the environment because there would no longer be factories to release carbon monoxide which reacts with others pollutants in the air, forming ozone that interferes with the ability of sensitive plants to produce making them more likely to be harm by diseases, insects or other pollutants. As well as it would benefit and prove to people that sustainability can be a realistic objective, as long as we set our goal achieve and attain to that goal to make the environment better. In other words, by changing
Huub Spiertz states that, sustainability is more about science than politics. He believes that, a scientific approach to sustainability takes into consideration natural resources; in order to sustain growing world population, scientist need to make use of new breakthroughs in agro technologies and biotechnologies. Meaning that scientist need to step up their game, and create new things that can be used, without causing any harm into the environment. He also implies that, food security can be can be follow by combining new insights in genetics, systems functioning, climate change, and multiple stresses to guide development of new cultivars. On the other side, there’s Bill McKibben; he believes that, sustainability is more about politics than science. He claims that, money and vested political interests undermine efforts towards sustainability and this reflects in politics. He infers that, politicians choose to discredit the science of climate change. He also implies that, some politicians twist scientific truths to follow their own limited interests; as well as, the denial of climate change and the lack of political