04-07-2014, 03:37 PM
“1. : capable of being sustained." The primary example tosses a big snafu in the proposed act of sustainability by virtue of being in an active lava zone. From that example, we can ascertain that the naturally living content of the region is subject to near future extinction/burial by shifting lava flows. Thus it's eco value on a global scale is near the bottom of the relative value list at this time.
The intent of sustainability also goes beyond the product in other ways as in not interfering with a natural eco system as cited above, hence the goal of creating something that is sustainable and not necessary to rebuild in order to preserve the greater eco system by not tapping the origin resource again. This places us in a region best suited for renewable resource construction methods.
True sustainability adopts as a primary target those regions that are non arable and have little to no living ecosystem (Inland Antarctica) or not yet existing (submerged cities not located upon reef systems or naturally occupied sea floor ecosystems and also cities upon the moon or other non inhabited planetoids) and second place target regions would be subject to natural self destruction (Such as an active volcano or an area that is currently covered by sand or will be shortly covered by sand).
We here in Puna live in a second best region as to not infringe upon a current permanent/sustained ecosystem as Kilauea will variably burry most of this region in the next several centuries and over time perhaps a couple thousand feet deep under lava.
So Puna and parts Kau are second best places to build because we're not infringing upon a permanently fixed eco system here.
As per the longevity of the products such as buildings etc. A practical approach on a sustainable level in a non sustainable self destructive region would be to build with products that are not permanent in stature but rather renewable and not using those things that are limited such as steel, concrete and other limited resource products. Because these products will eventually be buried by lava and not retrievable any time in the next several million years until recycled through the planet.
Considering the above and the practical application of true sustainability coupled by this regions characteristics, I see the preservation of the original village of Pahoa to be as sustainable as is practical within the said region.
The intent of sustainability also goes beyond the product in other ways as in not interfering with a natural eco system as cited above, hence the goal of creating something that is sustainable and not necessary to rebuild in order to preserve the greater eco system by not tapping the origin resource again. This places us in a region best suited for renewable resource construction methods.
True sustainability adopts as a primary target those regions that are non arable and have little to no living ecosystem (Inland Antarctica) or not yet existing (submerged cities not located upon reef systems or naturally occupied sea floor ecosystems and also cities upon the moon or other non inhabited planetoids) and second place target regions would be subject to natural self destruction (Such as an active volcano or an area that is currently covered by sand or will be shortly covered by sand).
We here in Puna live in a second best region as to not infringe upon a current permanent/sustained ecosystem as Kilauea will variably burry most of this region in the next several centuries and over time perhaps a couple thousand feet deep under lava.
So Puna and parts Kau are second best places to build because we're not infringing upon a permanently fixed eco system here.
As per the longevity of the products such as buildings etc. A practical approach on a sustainable level in a non sustainable self destructive region would be to build with products that are not permanent in stature but rather renewable and not using those things that are limited such as steel, concrete and other limited resource products. Because these products will eventually be buried by lava and not retrievable any time in the next several million years until recycled through the planet.
Considering the above and the practical application of true sustainability coupled by this regions characteristics, I see the preservation of the original village of Pahoa to be as sustainable as is practical within the said region.
