« durable urbanism? durable transport? | Main | online "map movies": useful? »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

In Brisbane

What about apocalyptic transit?
That's much more fun!

Durable Is Not Necessarily Sustainable

"Durable" isn't necessarily "Desirable": plastics compounds floating in the ocean are very durable and also very destructive. While durable may be a better word to use for transit - evoking the image of a service you can count on - sustainability is a different concept. For example, food you can compost may sustainable, but not durable!


Expanding on Wad's comment, I would like to add the the little word of "dynamism". Nature and history are never stable and therefore calls to live "sustainably" and "in balance with nature" have a slightly utopian color. The course of nature and history is filled with semistable equilibria, reconfigurations and renewals with all their tragedy. What stops evolving dies.

Relevance to transit? It might prompt some thinking about transit networks, their various technologies and their ability to adapt to the times. The question of cars comes into this too. How dynamic does transit have to be to survive and thrive?

The comments to this entry are closed.

the firm

Jarrett is now in ...

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...