Sustainable technology of 3870

Leave a Comment / Sustainable technology of 3870 / By
67 / 100
Powered by Rank Math SEO

Sustainable technology of 3870 ?

Sustainable technology in 3870 would likely be highly advanced and integrated into all aspects of life. Here are some potential features:

  • Energy:
    • Fusion power would be the primary energy source, providing clean and abundant energy.
    • Solar energy would still be utilized, with highly efficient solar panels integrated into buildings and infrastructure.
    • Energy storage would be highly advanced, allowing for efficient distribution and use of renewable energy sources.
  • Transportation:
    • Flying cars and other advanced air transportation would be common, powered by clean energy sources.
    • Hyperloop or similar high-speed ground transportation systems would connect cities and regions.
    • Self-driving electric vehicles would be the norm for personal transportation.
  • Manufacturing:
    • Nanotechnology and 3D printing would be used to create highly efficient and sustainable manufacturing processes.
    • Materials would be sourced sustainably and recycled efficiently.
    • Factories would be highly automated and energy-efficient.
  • Agriculture:
    • Vertical farms and other advanced agricultural technologies would be used to produce food sustainably and efficiently.
    • Genetically modified crops would be used to increase yields and reduce the need for pesticides and herbicides.
    • Food waste would be minimized through efficient distribution and consumption systems.
  • Waste Management:
    • Waste would be recycled and reused at a very high rate.
    • Advanced technologies would be used to break down waste and extract valuable resources.
    • Landfills would be a thing of the past.
  • Communication:
    • Neural interfaces would be common, allowing for direct communication with computers and other devices.
    • The internet would be highly advanced and accessible to everyone.
    • Virtual reality and augmented reality would be used for entertainment, education, and communication.
  • Healthcare:
    • Nanotechnology and other advanced medical technologies would be used to diagnose and treat diseases.
    • Personalized medicine would be the norm, with treatments tailored to individual patients.
    • Life expectancy would be significantly higher than it is today.

Overall, sustainable technology in 3870 would be focused on creating a world where humans can live in harmony with the environment. It would be a world where resources are used efficiently, waste is minimized, and everyone has access to the basic necessities of life.

What is Sustainable technology of 3870 ?

Sustainable technology in 3870 would be incredibly advanced and seamlessly integrated into every aspect of life. Here’s a glimpse of what it might look like:

Energy:

  • Fusion power: This would likely be the primary energy source, providing clean, safe, and virtually limitless power.
  • Advanced solar technology: Solar panels would be incredibly efficient and integrated into buildings, infrastructure, and even clothing.
  • Global energy grid: A highly intelligent grid would manage energy distribution, balancing supply and demand across the planet.

Environment:

  • Atmospheric regeneration: Technology might exist to actively repair and restore the Earth’s atmosphere, reversing the effects of pollution and climate change.
  • Ocean cleanup and restoration: Advanced robotics and nanotechnology could be used to remove pollutants from the oceans and restore marine ecosystems.
  • Reforestation and habitat restoration: Large-scale efforts to restore forests and natural habitats could be underway, using drones, AI, and other advanced technologies.

Transportation:

  • Flying cars and personal aircraft: Safe and efficient air transportation would be common, powered by clean energy sources.
  • Hyperloop networks: High-speed travel across continents would be possible through networks of hyperloop tubes or similar technology.
  • Autonomous vehicles: Self-driving electric vehicles would be the norm for personal transportation, optimizing traffic flow and reducing accidents.

Manufacturing and Production:

  • Nanotechnology and 3D printing: These technologies would enable the creation of almost anything on demand, using sustainable materials and minimizing waste.
  • Circular economy: Products would be designed for disassembly and reuse, with materials being recycled and repurposed endlessly.
  • Automated factories: Highly automated and efficient factories would produce goods with minimal environmental impact.

Agriculture and Food:

  • Vertical farms and hydroponics: Food production would take place in highly efficient vertical farms and hydroponic systems, reducing the need for land and water.
  • Cultured meat and alternative proteins: Sustainable and ethical alternatives to traditional meat production would be widely available.
  • Personalized nutrition: Technology could analyze an individual’s needs and create personalized food plans to optimize health.

Communication and Information:

  • Neural interfaces: Direct brain-computer interfaces could be common, allowing for seamless communication and access to information.
  • Global interconnected network: A highly advanced internet would connect everyone and everything, providing access to vast amounts of knowledge and resources.
  • Virtual and augmented reality: These technologies would be integrated into daily life, enhancing communication, education, and entertainment.

Healthcare:

  • Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology would be used for targeted drug delivery, disease diagnosis, and even cellular repair.
  • Personalized medicine: Treatments would be tailored to an individual’s genetic makeup and specific health needs.
  • Life extension technologies: Advances in biotechnology and medicine could significantly extend human lifespan and improve quality of life in old age.

Society:

  • Global cooperation: Sustainable technology would likely require a high level of global cooperation and collaboration to address shared challenges.
  • Resource management: Advanced systems would monitor and manage resources, ensuring equitable distribution and preventing shortages.
  • Ethical considerations: The development and use of advanced technologies would need to be guided by ethical principles to ensure fairness and prevent misuse.

Sustainable technology in 3870 would be a testament to human ingenuity and our ability to create a world where technology and nature coexist in harmony. It would be a world where everyone has access to the resources they need to live a healthy and fulfilling life, while preserving the planet for future generations.

Who is required Sustainable technology of 3870 ?

It’s interesting to think about who might “require” sustainable technology in 3870! Here’s a breakdown of who would rely on it and why:

  • Everyone on Earth: This is the most fundamental point. By 3870, the consequences of unsustainable practices would likely be severe. Sustainable technology would be essential for basic survival and quality of life for all humans. This includes:
    • Access to clean energy: For homes, transportation, and industry.
    • Safe and nutritious food: Produced sustainably to avoid environmental damage and ensure everyone has enough.
    • Clean water and sanitation: Crucial for health and preventing disease.
    • A habitable environment: With clean air, stable climate, and thriving ecosystems.
  • Future Generations: Sustainable technology is inherently about ensuring that those who come after us have the resources and a healthy planet to live on. It’s about not depleting resources or causing irreversible damage that would make their lives difficult or impossible.
  • Governments and Organizations: In 3870, these entities would have a huge responsibility to:
    • Maintain and advance sustainable technologies: Investing in research and development to improve existing solutions and find new ones.
    • Enforce regulations: To ensure that individuals and industries use sustainable practices and don’t harm the environment.
    • Promote global cooperation: As many environmental challenges are global, requiring collaboration between nations.
  • Industries: All industries would need to operate within sustainable frameworks. This means:
    • Using renewable energy: And minimizing their carbon footprint.
    • Sourcing materials responsibly: Ensuring they aren’t depleting resources or harming ecosystems.
    • Minimizing waste: Through recycling, reusing, and designing products for a circular economy.
  • Individuals: Each person would have a role to play in:
    • Conserving resources: Using energy and water wisely, and reducing consumption.
    • Making sustainable choices: In their transportation, food, and purchasing decisions.
    • Supporting sustainable practices: Through their actions and advocacy.

Why is it a “requirement”?

In 3870, sustainable technology wouldn’t be just a good idea, it would be a necessity. The alternative would likely be a planet with severe environmental problems, resource scarcity, and potentially widespread hardship. Sustainable technology would be the foundation upon which society functions, ensuring the well-being of both current and future generations.

When is required Sustainable technology of 3870 ?

This is a fascinating question! It’s not just about when sustainable technology is required in 3870, but also why it becomes absolutely essential. Here’s a breakdown:

The “When” is Inevitable:

  • Long-term consequences: By 3870, the cumulative effects of unsustainable practices over centuries would likely have reached a critical point. Climate change, resource depletion, and pollution would have drastically altered the planet, making many areas uninhabitable or severely challenging to live in.
  • Survival necessity: In such a scenario, sustainable technology wouldn’t be a choice, but a fundamental requirement for survival. It would be the only way to ensure access to clean energy, food, water, and a stable environment.

The “Why” is Multifaceted:

  • Environmental collapse: Unsustainable practices would have led to widespread environmental damage, including:
    • Extreme weather events: More frequent and intense hurricanes, droughts, floods, and heatwaves.
    • Sea level rise: Inundating coastal cities and displacing millions of people.
    • Loss of biodiversity: Extinction of countless species, disrupting ecosystems and food chains.
    • Resource scarcity: Depletion of essential resources like water, minerals, and arable land.
  • Societal breakdown: Environmental degradation would lead to:
    • Food shortages and famine: Causing widespread hunger and malnutrition.
    • Mass migrations and conflicts: As people are forced to leave their homes due to environmental disasters or resource scarcity.
    • Economic instability: Disrupting industries and trade, leading to poverty and hardship.
  • Human health crisis: Pollution and environmental toxins would contribute to:
    • Increased rates of disease: Respiratory illnesses, cancers, and other health problems.
    • Reduced life expectancy: Due to environmental factors and limited access to healthcare.

Sustainable Technology as the Solution:

In this context, sustainable technology would be crucial for:

  • Mitigating environmental damage: Reversing the effects of pollution, restoring ecosystems, and stabilizing the climate.
  • Adapting to changed conditions: Developing new ways to produce food, generate energy, and manage resources in a challenging environment.
  • Ensuring basic needs: Providing everyone with access to clean water, nutritious food, and safe shelter.
  • Building a resilient society: Creating systems that can withstand future environmental challenges and ensure long-term survival.

Essentially, by 3870, sustainable technology would be the foundation upon which human civilization is rebuilt. It would be the key to ensuring the survival and well-being of humanity in a world shaped by the consequences of past actions.

Where is required Sustainable technology of 3870 ?

You’re right to think about the “where” of sustainable technology in 3870! It won’t just exist in isolation, but will be deeply integrated into all aspects of life and across the globe. Here’s a breakdown of the key areas:

1. Global Infrastructure:

  • Energy grids: A worldwide network of smart grids would distribute clean energy from sources like fusion power plants and advanced solar farms, ensuring everyone has access.
  • Transportation networks: Hyperloop systems, air traffic corridors, and charging infrastructure for electric vehicles would span continents, enabling efficient and sustainable travel.
  • Communication networks: A highly advanced, globally accessible internet would connect everyone, facilitating communication, education, and access to information.

2. Urban Environments:

  • Smart cities: Cities would be designed with sustainability at their core, featuring:
    • Energy-efficient buildings with integrated solar panels and smart energy management systems.
    • Green spaces and vertical farms to provide fresh food and improve air quality.
    • Advanced waste management and recycling systems.
    • Public transportation systems powered by clean energy.
  • Habitats: Even in remote areas, sustainable technology would be essential for:
    • Providing access to clean water and sanitation.
    • Enabling sustainable agriculture and food production.
    • Supporting local communities and preserving cultural heritage.

3. Rural and Agricultural Areas:

  • Sustainable farming: Vertical farms, hydroponics, and precision agriculture would be used to produce food efficiently and with minimal environmental impact.
  • Ecosystem restoration: Technology would be used to reforest areas, restore wetlands, and protect biodiversity.
  • Resource management: Advanced systems would monitor and manage water resources, preventing shortages and ensuring equitable distribution.

4. Homes and Personal Spaces:

  • Smart homes: Homes would be equipped with technology to:
    • Optimize energy use.
    • Manage water consumption.
    • Recycle waste.
    • Provide access to clean energy and communication networks.
  • Personal devices: Wearable technology and neural interfaces could monitor health, provide personalized nutrition plans, and connect individuals to the global network.

5. Industrial and Manufacturing Sectors:

  • Sustainable factories: Factories would be highly automated and energy-efficient, using nanotechnology and 3D printing to create products on demand with minimal waste.
  • Circular economy: Products would be designed for disassembly and reuse, with materials being recycled and repurposed endlessly.
  • Resource management: Industries would operate within strict environmental guidelines, minimizing their impact on the planet.

6. Space and Beyond:

  • Space exploration: Sustainable technology would be essential for space exploration and colonization, enabling:
    • Production of resources in space.
    • Development of closed-loop life support systems.
    • Sustainable habitats on other planets.

Essentially, sustainable technology in 3870 would be woven into the fabric of society, existing everywhere and supporting all aspects of life. It would be a global endeavor, requiring collaboration and innovation from people all over the world to ensure a sustainable future for humanity.

How is required Sustainable technology of 3870 ?

Sustainable technology in 3870 wouldn’t just be present, it would be actively required in a multitude of ways. Here’s how it would be enforced and maintained:

1. Global Regulations and Standards:

  • International agreements: By 3870, there would likely be strong international agreements and treaties mandating the use of sustainable technologies and practices across all nations. These agreements would set standards for energy production, resource management, waste disposal, and environmental protection.
  • Enforcement mechanisms: There would be mechanisms in place to enforce these regulations, potentially including international bodies with the authority to monitor compliance and impose penalties for violations.

2. Technological Safeguards:

  • Built-in limitations: Technologies could be designed with built-in limitations to prevent unsustainable use. For example, energy systems might have caps on consumption, or manufacturing processes might be programmed to use only recycled materials.
  • Monitoring systems: Advanced monitoring systems could track resource usage and environmental impact in real-time, alerting authorities to potential problems and enabling swift action.
  • AI and automation: Artificial intelligence could play a role in optimizing resource use and identifying unsustainable practices, automatically adjusting systems to maintain balance.

3. Economic Incentives:

  • Carbon pricing: A global carbon tax or cap-and-trade system could make unsustainable practices financially prohibitive, encouraging businesses and individuals to adopt sustainable alternatives.
  • Subsidies and incentives: Governments could provide subsidies and incentives for the development and use of sustainable technologies, making them more affordable and accessible.
  • Circular economy models: Economic systems could be designed around the principles of a circular economy, where resources are reused and recycled endlessly, minimizing waste and maximizing efficiency.

4. Social and Cultural Norms:

  • Education and awareness: Education systems would likely emphasize the importance of sustainability and equip individuals with the knowledge and skills to live sustainably.
  • Cultural values: Sustainable practices could become deeply ingrained in social and cultural norms, with individuals and communities taking pride in their commitment to environmental stewardship.
  • Community-based initiatives: Local communities could play a role in monitoring and enforcing sustainable practices, holding individuals and businesses accountable for their environmental impact.

5. Technological Evolution:

  • Continuous improvement: Ongoing research and development would be essential to continuously improve sustainable technologies and find new solutions to emerging challenges.
  • Adaptability: Technologies would need to be adaptable to changing environmental conditions and able to withstand extreme weather events or other disruptions.
  • Resilience: Systems would be designed with resilience in mind, ensuring that they can continue to function even in the face of unexpected events or crises.

In essence, the “how” of requiring sustainable technology in 3870 would involve a combination of top-down regulations, technological safeguards, economic incentives, social norms, and continuous innovation. It would be a multi-faceted approach, ensuring that sustainability is not just a goal, but a fundamental way of life.

Case study is Sustainable technology of 3870 ?

It’s tough to give a specific case study of sustainable technology in 3870, as that’s far into the future! But, we can create a hypothetical scenario based on the trends and possibilities we see today. Let’s imagine a case study focusing on global food security:

The Problem:

By 3870, climate change has drastically altered agricultural patterns. Traditional farming is largely impossible in many regions due to extreme weather, depleted soil, and water scarcity. A significant portion of the world’s population faces food insecurity.

The Solution:

A global initiative, “Nourish 3870”, is launched, combining several advanced sustainable technologies:

  • Vertical Farming Networks: Massive, interconnected vertical farms are established in urban centers and even in previously uninhabitable areas (e.g., deserts, arctic regions). These farms use:
    • Hydroponics and Aeroponics: Plants grow without soil, using nutrient-rich water or mist, drastically reducing water usage.
    • AI-powered Optimization: Sensors and AI algorithms monitor plant health, adjust environmental conditions (light, temperature, humidity), and optimize nutrient delivery for maximum yield and efficiency.
    • Renewable Energy: The farms are powered by fusion energy and integrated solar panels, minimizing their carbon footprint.
  • Cultured Meat Production: Large-scale facilities produce cultured meat and other protein alternatives, significantly reducing the need for traditional livestock farming, which is resource-intensive and contributes to greenhouse gas emissions.
  • Personalized Nutrition Systems: Each individual has access to a personalized nutrition system that analyzes their dietary needs, genetic predispositions, and health status. The system then recommends optimal food combinations and even generates customized food products using 3D printing and nanotechnology.
  • Food Waste Elimination: A global network tracks food production, distribution, and consumption. AI algorithms predict demand and optimize supply chains to minimize waste. Advanced composting and recycling systems transform any remaining food waste into valuable resources.

The Results:

  • Global Food Security: Hunger is virtually eliminated as everyone has access to nutritious and affordable food.
  • Environmental Restoration: The shift away from traditional agriculture allows for the restoration of natural ecosystems and biodiversity.
  • Reduced Resource Consumption: Water usage for food production is drastically reduced, and land previously used for agriculture is rewilded.
  • Improved Public Health: Personalized nutrition and access to healthy food contribute to improved health outcomes and increased life expectancy.

Key Takeaways:

This hypothetical case study illustrates how sustainable technology in 3870 could address a critical global challenge like food security. It highlights the potential of combining multiple technologies, integrating them into global systems, and using AI and automation to optimize efficiency and ensure equitable access to resources.

While this is just one example, it gives us a glimpse into the possibilities of what sustainable technology might achieve in the future. By imagining these scenarios, we can start thinking about the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead and how we can work towards a more sustainable future for all.

White paper on Sustainable technology of 3870 ?

White Paper: Sustainable Technology in 3870: A Vision for a Thriving Future

Abstract:

This white paper explores the potential landscape of sustainable technology in the year 3870. Building upon current trends and extrapolating advancements across various fields, it envisions a future where technology is deeply integrated with ecological principles, ensuring a thriving planet for generations to come. The paper examines key areas including energy, environment, production, society, and governance, outlining the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead.

1. Introduction:

The year 3870 represents a significant milestone in human history. Assuming continued progress, technological advancements over the next 1850 years (from 2020) will likely be transformative. This paper posits that by 3870, sustainability will be not just a desirable goal, but a fundamental necessity for human survival and well-being. It will be deeply woven into the fabric of society, driven by both environmental imperatives and a profound understanding of our interconnectedness with the planet.

2. Energy:

  • Fusion Power Dominance: Fusion energy will likely be the primary energy source, providing clean, abundant, and safe power. Advanced fusion reactors, potentially utilizing novel confinement methods and fuel cycles, will power cities and industries.
  • Space-Based Solar: Large-scale solar arrays in orbit will capture solar energy with unparalleled efficiency, beaming it back to Earth via microwave or laser transmission.
  • Geoengineering for Balance: Sophisticated geoengineering technologies, carefully managed and monitored, may be employed to maintain climate equilibrium and mitigate any residual effects of past environmental damage.

3. Environment:

  • Ecosystem Restoration: Nanotechnology and biotechnology will be used to actively restore damaged ecosystems, including forests, oceans, and coral reefs. AI-powered drones and robots will assist in reforestation efforts and pollution cleanup.
  • Atmospheric Management: Advanced technologies will monitor and regulate atmospheric composition, removing pollutants and greenhouse gases, and potentially even reversing past damage.
  • Biodiversity Preservation: Global databases and AI systems will track and protect biodiversity. Gene banks and advanced reproductive technologies will safeguard endangered species.

4. Production and Consumption:

  • Circular Economy: The concept of a circular economy will be fully realized. Products will be designed for disassembly and reuse, with materials being recycled and repurposed endlessly. Waste will be virtually eliminated.
  • Nanofabrication: Nanotechnology will enable the creation of materials and products with unprecedented precision and efficiency. 3D printing at the nanoscale will allow for on-demand manufacturing of complex objects.
  • Personalized Production: Individuals will have access to personal fabricators that can create customized products based on their needs, reducing the need for mass production and transportation.

5. Society and Governance:

  • Global Cooperation: Addressing global challenges like climate change and resource management will require unprecedented levels of international cooperation and collaboration. Global governance structures may evolve to facilitate this.
  • Universal Access: Sustainable technologies will be accessible to everyone, ensuring equitable distribution of resources and opportunities. Poverty and inequality will be significantly reduced.
  • Education for Sustainability: Education systems will emphasize the importance of sustainability and equip individuals with the knowledge and skills to live in harmony with the environment.

6. Challenges and Opportunities:

  • Ethical Considerations: The development and use of advanced technologies will raise complex ethical questions. Careful consideration will be needed to ensure that these technologies are used responsibly and for the benefit of all.
  • Technological Risks: Advanced technologies, particularly in areas like nanotechnology and geoengineering, carry potential risks. Robust safety protocols and monitoring systems will be essential.
  • Human Adaptation: Adapting to a world transformed by sustainable technology will require significant changes in human behavior and social structures. Education and communication will play a crucial role in this process.

7. Conclusion:

The vision of sustainable technology in 3870 presented in this white paper is ambitious, but achievable. By embracing innovation, fostering global cooperation, and prioritizing ethical considerations, we can create a future where humanity and nature thrive together. The journey towards this future will require sustained effort and commitment, but the rewards – a healthy planet and a prosperous society – will be well worth the effort.

Industrial application of Sustainable technology of 3870 ?

Let’s imagine some industrial applications of sustainable technology in 3870, building on the advancements we’ve discussed:

1. Fusion-Powered Manufacturing:

  • Clean Energy Source: Fusion power plants provide abundant, clean energy to fuel all industrial processes. This eliminates reliance on fossil fuels and significantly reduces the carbon footprint of manufacturing.
  • High-Temperature Processes: Fusion energy can also be used to generate extremely high temperatures needed for advanced materials processing, like creating new alloys or synthesizing complex molecules.

2. Nanofabrication and Advanced Materials:

  • On-Demand Production: Nanofabrication allows for the creation of incredibly precise and complex objects at the atomic level. Factories can produce customized goods on demand, minimizing waste and optimizing resource use.
  • Sustainable Materials: Industries will utilize advanced materials derived from recycled resources or even directly from the environment (e.g., extracting materials from seawater or utilizing abundant elements).
  • Self-Repairing Structures: Nanotechnology could enable the creation of self-repairing materials for industrial equipment and infrastructure, extending their lifespan and reducing maintenance costs.

3. Circular Economy and Closed-Loop Systems:

  • Zero-Waste Factories: Industrial processes are designed as closed-loop systems, where all byproducts are recycled or reused. Waste becomes a resource, eliminating the concept of industrial pollution.
  • Product Lifecycle Management: Products are designed for disassembly and component reuse from the outset. Manufacturers take back products at the end of their life cycle to recover valuable materials and components.

4. AI-Driven Optimization and Automation:

  • Predictive Maintenance: AI systems monitor industrial equipment in real-time, predicting potential failures and scheduling maintenance proactively. This minimizes downtime and extends the lifespan of machinery.
  • Resource Efficiency: AI algorithms optimize production processes to minimize energy and resource consumption. They can identify areas for improvement and automatically adjust parameters to maximize efficiency.
  • Autonomous Factories: Fully automated factories, managed by AI, can operate 24/7 with minimal human intervention. This increases productivity and reduces labor costs while also improving safety.

5. Biomanufacturing and Synthetic Biology:

  • Sustainable Production of Chemicals and Fuels: Biomanufacturing uses biological systems (e.g., engineered microbes) to produce valuable chemicals, fuels, and materials. This can replace traditional petrochemical processes, which are often environmentally damaging.
  • Biodegradable Materials: Industries can use synthetic biology to create biodegradable plastics and other materials derived from renewable resources. This reduces reliance on fossil fuel-based plastics and minimizes plastic waste.

6. Space-Based Industries:

  • Resource Extraction: Mining asteroids and other celestial bodies for valuable resources could become a major industry. Sustainable technologies would be crucial for extracting and processing these resources in space.
  • Space-Based Manufacturing: Manufacturing facilities in space could take advantage of the unique conditions (e.g., microgravity, vacuum) to create materials and products with enhanced properties.

Example Scenario: Sustainable Electronics Manufacturing:

Imagine a factory that produces electronic devices. It’s powered by fusion energy. Nanofabrication is used to create highly efficient components from recycled materials. The factory operates as a closed-loop system, with all waste being recycled or reused. AI systems optimize the production process and manage the supply chain. The devices themselves are designed for easy disassembly and component reuse, ensuring that they don’t end up as electronic waste.

These examples illustrate how sustainable technology in 3870 could revolutionize industrial practices, creating a world where manufacturing is not only efficient and productive but also environmentally responsible. It would be a world where industries operate in harmony with nature, ensuring a healthy planet for future generations.

Research and development of Sustainable technology of 3870 ?

Research and development (R&D) in sustainable technology for 3870 would be a continuous, evolving process, building upon the knowledge and advancements of previous centuries. Here are some potential areas of focus:

1. Advanced Energy Technologies:

  • Fusion Energy Optimization: Research would focus on improving the efficiency and safety of fusion reactors, exploring new fuel cycles and confinement methods.
  • Space-Based Solar Enhancements: Developing more efficient and cost-effective ways to capture and transmit solar energy from space, potentially using advanced materials and laser technology.
  • Energy Storage Solutions: Creating highly efficient and compact energy storage devices to balance supply and demand from renewable sources.
  • Quantum Energy: Exploring the potential of quantum phenomena for energy generation and transmission.

2. Environmental Restoration and Management:

  • Atmospheric Regeneration: Developing advanced technologies to actively remove pollutants and greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, and potentially even reverse past damage.
  • Ecosystem Restoration and Preservation: Utilizing nanotechnology and biotechnology to restore damaged ecosystems, protect biodiversity, and create resilient habitats.
  • Climate Engineering: Researching and carefully managing geoengineering technologies to maintain climate equilibrium and mitigate any residual effects of past environmental damage.
  • Planetary Health Monitoring: Developing sophisticated systems to monitor the health of the planet, including air and water quality, biodiversity, and ecosystem stability.

3. Advanced Materials and Manufacturing:

  • Nanotechnology and Materials Science: Exploring new applications of nanotechnology for creating sustainable materials with enhanced properties, such as self-repairing structures and biodegradable plastics.
  • Biomanufacturing and Synthetic Biology: Utilizing biological systems to produce valuable chemicals, fuels, and materials sustainably, reducing reliance on fossil fuels and petrochemical processes.
  • Circular Economy Technologies: Developing innovative ways to recycle and reuse materials, creating closed-loop systems for manufacturing and consumption.
  • 3D and 4D Printing: Advancing 3D printing technology to enable on-demand manufacturing of complex objects at the nanoscale, and exploring 4D printing for creating materials that can change shape over time.

4. Artificial Intelligence and Automation:

  • AI for Resource Optimization: Developing AI algorithms to optimize resource use in all sectors, from energy and agriculture to manufacturing and transportation.
  • Autonomous Systems for Environmental Management: Creating autonomous robots and drones to assist in environmental monitoring, restoration, and cleanup efforts.
  • Predictive Modeling for Sustainability: Using AI to model complex environmental systems and predict the impacts of human activities, enabling proactive decision-making.

5. Space-Based Technologies:

  • Space Resource Utilization: Developing sustainable technologies for extracting and processing resources from asteroids and other celestial bodies.
  • Space-Based Manufacturing: Creating manufacturing facilities in space to take advantage of unique conditions like microgravity and vacuum.
  • Space Colonization and Terraforming: Researching the potential for long-term human settlements on other planets and exploring the possibility of terraforming to make them habitable.

6. Social and Ethical Considerations:

  • Sustainable Development Models: Developing new economic and social models that prioritize sustainability and equitable resource distribution.
  • Ethical Frameworks for Technology: Creating ethical guidelines and regulations for the development and use of advanced technologies, ensuring that they are used responsibly and for the benefit of all.
  • Education and Public Engagement: Promoting education and public awareness about sustainability, empowering individuals to make informed choices and participate in creating a sustainable future.

Research Methods:

R&D in sustainable technology for 3870 would likely involve a combination of:

  • Fundamental research: Exploring new scientific principles and phenomena that could be applied to sustainable technologies.
  • Applied research: Developing and testing new technologies and solutions based on existing knowledge.
  • Interdisciplinary collaboration: Bringing together experts from various fields, including science, engineering, social sciences, and ethics.
  • Global partnerships: Fostering international collaboration and knowledge sharing to accelerate progress in sustainable technology.

By continuously investing in research and development, humanity can ensure that sustainable technology in 3870 is not only a necessity but also a source of innovation and progress, creating a thriving future for all.

References

  1. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Purvis, Ben; Mao, Yong; Robinson, Darren (2019). “Three pillars of sustainability: in search of conceptual origins”. Sustainability Science. 14 (3): 681–695. Bibcode:2019SuSc…14..681P. doi:10.1007/s11625-018-0627-5. ISSN 1862-4065.  Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
  2. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e Ramsey, Jeffry L. (2015). “On Not Defining Sustainability”. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics. 28 (6): 1075–1087. Bibcode:2015JAEE…28.1075R. doi:10.1007/s10806-015-9578-3. ISSN 1187-7863. S2CID 146790960.
  3. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f Kotzé, Louis J.; Kim, Rakhyun E.; Burdon, Peter; du Toit, Louise; Glass, Lisa-Maria; Kashwan, Prakash; Liverman, Diana; Montesano, Francesco S.; Rantala, Salla (2022). “Planetary Integrity”. In Sénit, Carole-Anne; Biermann, Frank; Hickmann, Thomas (eds.). The Political Impact of the Sustainable Development Goals: Transforming Governance Through Global Goals?. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 140–171. doi:10.1017/9781009082945.007. ISBN 978-1-316-51429-0.
  4. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f Bosselmann, Klaus (2010). “Losing the Forest for the Trees: Environmental Reductionism in the Law”. Sustainability. 2 (8): 2424–2448. doi:10.3390/su2082424. hdl:10535/6499. ISSN 2071-1050.  Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 International License
  5. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u Berg, Christian (2020). Sustainable action: overcoming the barriers. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-429-57873-1. OCLC 1124780147.
  6. ^ Jump up to:a b c “Sustainability”. Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 31 March 2022.
  7. ^ “Sustainable Development”. UNESCO. 3 August 2015. Retrieved 20 January 2022.
  8. ^ Jump up to:a b Kuhlman, Tom; Farrington, John (2010). “What is Sustainability?”. Sustainability. 2 (11): 3436–3448. doi:10.3390/su2113436. ISSN 2071-1050.
  9. ^ Nelson, Anitra (31 January 2024). “Degrowth as a Concept and Practice: Introduction”. The Commons Social Change Library. Retrieved 23 February 2024.
  10. ^ Jump up to:a b c d UNEP (2011) Decoupling natural resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth, A Report of the Working Group on Decoupling to the International Resource Panel. Fischer-Kowalski, M., Swilling, M., von Weizsäcker, E.U., Ren, Y., Moriguchi, Y., Crane, W., Krausmann, F., Eisenmenger, N., Giljum, S., Hennicke, P., Romero Lankao, P., Siriban Manalang, A., Sewerin, S.
  11. ^ Jump up to:a b c Vadén, T.; Lähde, V.; Majava, A.; Järvensivu, P.; Toivanen, T.; Hakala, E.; Eronen, J.T. (2020). “Decoupling for ecological sustainability: A categorisation and review of research literature”. Environmental Science & Policy. 112: 236–244. Bibcode:2020ESPol.112..236V. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2020.06.016. PMC 7330600. PMID 32834777.
  12. ^ Jump up to:a b c d Parrique T., Barth J., Briens F., C. Kerschner, Kraus-Polk A., Kuokkanen A., Spangenberg J.H., 2019. Decoupling debunked: Evidence and arguments against green growth as a sole strategy for sustainability. European Environmental Bureau.
  13. ^ Parrique, T., Barth, J., Briens, F., Kerschner, C., Kraus-Polk, A., Kuokkanen, A., & Spangenberg, J. H. (2019). Decoupling debunked. Evidence and arguments against green growth as a sole strategy for sustainability. A study edited by the European Environment Bureau EEB.
  14. ^ Hardyment, Richard (2024). Measuring Good Business: Making Sense of Environmental, Social & Governance Data. Abingdon: Routledge. ISBN 9781032601199.
  15. ^ Bell, Simon; Morse, Stephen (2012). Sustainability Indicators: Measuring the Immeasurable?. Abington: Routledge. ISBN 978-1-84407-299-6.
  16. ^ Jump up to:a b c Howes, Michael; Wortley, Liana; Potts, Ruth; Dedekorkut-Howes, Aysin; Serrao-Neumann, Silvia; Davidson, Julie; Smith, Timothy; Nunn, Patrick (2017). “Environmental Sustainability: A Case of Policy Implementation Failure?”. Sustainability. 9 (2): 165. doi:10.3390/su9020165. hdl:10453/90953. ISSN 2071-1050.
  17. ^ Jump up to:a b Kinsley, M. and Lovins, L.H. (September 1997). “Paying for Growth, Prospering from Development.” Archived 17 July 2011 at the Wayback Machine Retrieved 15 June 2009.
  18. ^ Jump up to:a b Sustainable Shrinkage: Envisioning a Smaller, Stronger Economy Archived 11 April 2016 at the Wayback Machine. Thesolutionsjournal.com. Retrieved 13 March 2016.
  19. ^ Apetrei, Cristina I.; Caniglia, Guido; von Wehrden, Henrik; Lang, Daniel J. (1 May 2021). “Just another buzzword? A systematic literature review of knowledge-related concepts in sustainability science”. Global Environmental Change. 68: 102222. Bibcode:2021GEC….6802222A. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102222. ISSN 0959-3780.
  20. ^ Jump up to:a b c Benson, Melinda Harm; Craig, Robin Kundis (2014). “End of Sustainability”. Society & Natural Resources. 27 (7): 777–782. Bibcode:2014SNatR..27..777B. doi:10.1080/08941920.2014.901467. ISSN 0894-1920. S2CID 67783261.
  21. ^ Jump up to:a b c Stockholm+50: Unlocking a Better Future. Stockholm Environment Institute (Report). 18 May 2022. doi:10.51414/sei2022.011. S2CID 248881465.
  22. ^ Jump up to:a b Scoones, Ian (2016). “The Politics of Sustainability and Development”. Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 41 (1): 293–319. doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-090039. ISSN 1543-5938. S2CID 156534921.
  23. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i Harrington, Lisa M. Butler (2016). “Sustainability Theory and Conceptual Considerations: A Review of Key Ideas for Sustainability, and the Rural Context”. Papers in Applied Geography. 2 (4): 365–382. Bibcode:2016PAGeo…2..365H. doi:10.1080/23754931.2016.1239222. ISSN 2375-4931. S2CID 132458202.
  24. ^ Jump up to:a b c d United Nations General Assembly (1987) Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. Transmitted to the General Assembly as an Annex to document A/42/427 – Development and International Co-operation: Environment.
  25. ^ United Nations General Assembly (20 March 1987). “Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future; Transmitted to the General Assembly as an Annex to document A/42/427 – Development and International Co-operation: Environment; Our Common Future, Chapter 2: Towards Sustainable Development; Paragraph 1″. United Nations General Assembly. Retrieved 1 March 2010.
  26. ^ “University of Alberta: What is sustainability?” (PDF). mcgill.ca. Retrieved 13 August 2022.
  27. ^ Jump up to:a b Halliday, Mike (21 November 2016). “How sustainable is sustainability?”. Oxford College of Procurement and Supply. Retrieved 12 July 2022.
  28. ^ Harper, Douglas. “sustain”. Online Etymology Dictionary.
  29. ^ Onions, Charles, T. (ed) (1964). The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 2095.
  30. ^ “Sustainability Theories”. World Ocean Review. Retrieved 20 June 2019.
  31. ^ Compare: “sustainability”. Oxford English Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Press. (Subscription or participating institution membership required.) The English-language word had a legal technical sense from 1835 and a resource-management connotation from 1953.
  32. ^ “Hans Carl von Carlowitz and Sustainability”. Environment and Society Portal. Retrieved 20 June 2019.
  33. ^ Dresden, SLUB. “Sylvicultura Oeconomica, Oder Haußwirthliche Nachricht und Naturmäßige Anweisung Zur Wilden Baum-Zucht”. digital.slub-dresden.de (in German). Retrieved 28 March 2022.
  34. ^ Von Carlowitz, H.C. & Rohr, V. (1732) Sylvicultura Oeconomica, oder Haußwirthliche Nachricht und Naturmäßige Anweisung zur Wilden Baum Zucht, Leipzig; translated from German as cited in Friederich, Simon; Symons, Jonathan (15 November 2022). “Operationalising sustainability? Why sustainability fails as an investment criterion for safeguarding the future”. Global Policy. 14: 1758–5899.13160. doi:10.1111/1758-5899.13160. ISSN 1758-5880. S2CID 253560289.
  35. ^ Basler, Ernst (1972). Strategy of Progress: Environmental Pollution, Habitat Scarcity and Future Research (originally, Strategie des Fortschritts: Umweltbelastung Lebensraumverknappung and Zukunftsforshung). BLV Publishing Company.
  36. ^ Gadgil, M.; Berkes, F. (1991). “Traditional Resource Management Systems”. Resource Management and Optimization. 8: 127–141.
  37. ^ “Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 16 September 2005, 60/1. 2005 World Summit Outcome” (PDF). United Nations General Assembly. 2005. Retrieved 17 January 2022.
  38. ^ Barbier, Edward B. (July 1987). “The Concept of Sustainable Economic Development”. Environmental Conservation. 14 (2): 101–110. Bibcode:1987EnvCo..14..101B. doi:10.1017/S0376892900011449. ISSN 1469-4387.
  39. ^ Jump up to:a b Bosselmann, K. (2022) Chapter 2: A normative approach to environmental governance: sustainability at the apex of environmental law, Research Handbook on Fundamental Concepts of Environmental Law, edited by Douglas Fisher
  40. ^ Jump up to:a b “Agenda 21” (PDF). United Nations Conference on Environment & Development, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 3 to 14 June 1992. 1992. Retrieved 17 January 2022.
  41. ^ Jump up to:a b c d United Nations (2015) Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015, Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (A/RES/70/1 Archived 28 November 2020 at the Wayback Machine)
  42. ^ Scott Cato, M. (2009). Green Economics. London: Earthscan, pp. 36–37. ISBN 978-1-84407-571-3.
  43. ^ Jump up to:a b Obrecht, Andreas; Pham-Truffert, Myriam; Spehn, Eva; Payne, Davnah; Altermatt, Florian; Fischer, Manuel; Passarello, Cristian; Moersberger, Hannah; Schelske, Oliver; Guntern, Jodok; Prescott, Graham (5 February 2021). “Achieving the SDGs with Biodiversity”. Swiss Academies Factsheet. Vol. 16, no. 1. doi:10.5281/zenodo.4457298.
  44. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f Raskin, P.; Banuri, T.; Gallopín, G.; Gutman, P.; Hammond, A.; Kates, R.; Swart, R. (2002). Great transition: the promise and lure of the times ahead. Boston: Stockholm Environment Institute. ISBN 0-9712418-1-3. OCLC 49987854.
  45. ^ Ekins, Paul; Zenghelis, Dimitri (2021). “The costs and benefits of environmental sustainability”. Sustainability Science. 16 (3): 949–965. Bibcode:2021SuSc…16..949E. doi:10.1007/s11625-021-00910-5. PMC 7960882. PMID 33747239.
  46. ^ William L. Thomas, ed. (1956). Man’s role in changing the face of the earth. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-79604-3. OCLC 276231.
  47. ^ Carson, Rachel (2002) [1st. Pub. Houghton Mifflin, 1962]. Silent Spring. Mariner Books. ISBN 978-0-618-24906-0.
  48. ^ Arrhenius, Svante (1896). “XXXI. On the influence of carbonic acid in the air upon the temperature of the ground”. The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science. 41 (251): 237–276. doi:10.1080/14786449608620846. ISSN 1941-5982.
  49. ^ Jump up to:a b c UN (1973) Report of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, A/CONF.48/14/Rev.1, Stockholm, 5–16 June 1972
  50. ^ UNEP (2021). “Making Peace With Nature”. UNEP – UN Environment Programme. Retrieved 30 March 2022.
  51. ^ Jump up to:a b c d Ripple, William J.; Wolf, Christopher; Newsome, Thomas M.; Galetti, Mauro; Alamgir, Mohammed; Crist, Eileen; Mahmoud, Mahmoud I.; Laurance, William F.; 15,364 scientist signatories from 184 countries (2017). “World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity: A Second Notice”. BioScience. 67 (12): 1026–1028. doi:10.1093/biosci/bix125. hdl:11336/71342. ISSN 0006-3568.
  52. ^ Crutzen, Paul J. (2002). “Geology of mankind”. Nature. 415 (6867): 23. Bibcode:2002Natur.415…23C. doi:10.1038/415023a. ISSN 0028-0836. PMID 11780095. S2CID 9743349.
  53. ^ Jump up to:a b Wilhelm Krull, ed. (2000). Zukunftsstreit (in German). Weilerwist: Velbrück Wissenschaft. ISBN 3-934730-17-5. OCLC 52639118.
  54. ^ Redclift, Michael (2005). “Sustainable development (1987-2005): an oxymoron comes of age”. Sustainable Development. 13 (4): 212–227. doi:10.1002/sd.281. ISSN 0968-0802.
  55. ^ Daly, Herman E. (1996). Beyond growth: the economics of sustainable development (PDF). Boston: Beacon Press. ISBN 0-8070-4708-2. OCLC 33946953.
  56. ^ United Nations (2017) Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 6 July 2017, Work of the Statistical Commission pertaining to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (A/RES/71/313)
  57. ^ “UN Environment | UNDP-UN Environment Poverty-Environment Initiative”. UN Environment | UNDP-UN Environment Poverty-Environment Initiative. Retrieved 24 January 2022.
  58. ^ PEP (2016) Poverty-Environment Partnership Joint Paper | June 2016 Getting to Zero – A Poverty, Environment and Climate Call to Action for the Sustainable Development Goals
  59. ^ Boyer, Robert H. W.; Peterson, Nicole D.; Arora, Poonam; Caldwell, Kevin (2016). “Five Approaches to Social Sustainability and an Integrated Way Forward”. Sustainability. 8 (9): 878. doi:10.3390/su8090878.
  60. ^ Doğu, Feriha Urfalı; Aras, Lerzan (2019). “Measuring Social Sustainability with the Developed MCSA Model: Güzelyurt Case”. Sustainability. 11 (9): 2503. doi:10.3390/su11092503. ISSN 2071-1050.
  61. ^ Davidson, Mark (2010). “Social Sustainability and the City: Social sustainability and city”. Geography Compass. 4 (7): 872–880. doi:10.1111/j.1749-8198.2010.00339.x.
  62. ^ Missimer, Merlina; Robèrt, Karl-Henrik; Broman, Göran (2017). “A strategic approach to social sustainability – Part 2: a principle-based definition”. Journal of Cleaner Production. 140: 42–52. Bibcode:2017JCPro.140…42M. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.059.
  63. ^ Boyer, Robert; Peterson, Nicole; Arora, Poonam; Caldwell, Kevin (2016). “Five Approaches to Social Sustainability and an Integrated Way Forward”. Sustainability. 8 (9): 878. doi:10.3390/su8090878. ISSN 2071-1050.
  64. ^ James, Paul; with Magee, Liam; Scerri, Andy; Steger, Manfred B. (2015). Urban Sustainability in Theory and Practice: Circles of Sustainability. London: Routledge. ISBN 9781315765747.
  65. ^ Liam Magee; Andy Scerri; Paul James; James A. Thom; Lin Padgham; Sarah Hickmott; Hepu Deng; Felicity Cahill (2013). “Reframing social sustainability reporting: Towards an engaged approach”. Environment, Development and Sustainability. 15 (1): 225–243. Bibcode:2013EDSus..15..225M. doi:10.1007/s10668-012-9384-2. S2CID 153452740.
  66. ^ Cohen, J. E. (2006). “Human Population: The Next Half Century.”. In Kennedy, D. (ed.). Science Magazine’s State of the Planet 2006-7. London: Island Press. pp. 13–21. ISBN 9781597266246.
  67. ^ Jump up to:a b c Aggarwal, Dhruvak; Esquivel, Nhilce; Hocquet, Robin; Martin, Kristiina; Mungo, Carol; Nazareth, Anisha; Nikam, Jaee; Odenyo, Javan; Ravindran, Bhuvan; Kurinji, L. S.; Shawoo, Zoha; Yamada, Kohei (28 April 2022). Charting a youth vision for a just and sustainable future (PDF) (Report). Stockholm Environment Institute. doi:10.51414/sei2022.010.
  68. ^ “The Regional Institute – WACOSS Housing and Sustainable Communities Indicators Project”. www.regional.org.au. 2012. Retrieved 26 January 2022.
  69. ^ Virtanen, Pirjo Kristiina; Siragusa, Laura; Guttorm, Hanna (2020). “Introduction: toward more inclusive definitions of sustainability”. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. 43: 77–82. Bibcode:2020COES…43…77V. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2020.04.003. S2CID 219663803.
  70. ^ “Culture: Fourth Pillar of Sustainable Development”. United Cities and Local Governments. Archived from the original on 3 October 2013.
  71. ^ James, Paul; Magee, Liam (2016). “Domains of Sustainability”. In Farazmand, Ali (ed.). Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance. Cham: Springer International Publishing. pp. 1–17. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_2760-1. ISBN 978-3-319-31816-5. Retrieved 28 March 2022.
  72. ^ Jump up to:a b Robert U. Ayres & Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh & John M. Gowdy, 1998. “Viewpoint: Weak versus Strong Sustainability“, Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 98-103/3, Tinbergen Institute.
  73. ^ Pearce, David W.; Atkinson, Giles D. (1993). “Capital theory and the measurement of sustainable development: an indicator of “weak” sustainability”. Ecological Economics. 8 (2): 103–108. Bibcode:1993EcoEc…8..103P. doi:10.1016/0921-8009(93)90039-9.
  74. ^ Ayres, Robert; van den Berrgh, Jeroen; Gowdy, John (2001). “Strong versus Weak Sustainability”. Environmental Ethics. 23 (2): 155–168. doi:10.5840/enviroethics200123225. ISSN 0163-4275.
  75. ^ Cabeza Gutés, Maite (1996). “The concept of weak sustainability”. Ecological Economics. 17 (3): 147–156. Bibcode:1996EcoEc..17..147C. doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(96)80003-6.
  76. ^ Bosselmann, Klaus (2017). The principle of sustainability: transforming law and governance (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. ISBN 978-1-4724-8128-3. OCLC 951915998.
  77. ^ Jump up to:a b WEF (2020) Nature Risk Rising: Why the Crisis Engulfing Nature Matters for Business and the Economy New Nature Economy, World Economic Forum in collaboration with PwC
  78. ^ James, Paul; with Magee, Liam; Scerri, Andy; Steger, Manfred B. (2015). Urban Sustainability in Theory and Practice: Circles of Sustainability. London: Routledge. ISBN 9781315765747.
  79. ^ Jump up to:a b Hardyment, Richard (2 February 2024). Measuring Good Business. London: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781003457732. ISBN 978-1-003-45773-2.
  80. ^ Jump up to:a b Bell, Simon and Morse, Stephen 2008. Sustainability Indicators. Measuring the Immeasurable? 2nd edn. London: Earthscan. ISBN 978-1-84407-299-6.
  81. ^ Dalal-Clayton, Barry and Sadler, Barry 2009. Sustainability Appraisal: A Sourcebook and Reference Guide to International Experience. London: Earthscan. ISBN 978-1-84407-357-3.[page needed]
  82. ^ Hak, T. et al. 2007. Sustainability Indicators, SCOPE 67. Island Press, London. [1] Archived 2011-12-18 at the Wayback Machine
  83. ^ Wackernagel, Mathis; Lin, David; Evans, Mikel; Hanscom, Laurel; Raven, Peter (2019). “Defying the Footprint Oracle: Implications of Country Resource Trends”. Sustainability. 11 (7): 2164. doi:10.3390/su11072164.
  84. ^ “Sustainable Development visualized”. Sustainability concepts. Retrieved 24 March 2022.
  85. ^ Jump up to:a b Steffen, Will; Rockström, Johan; Cornell, Sarah; Fetzer, Ingo; Biggs, Oonsie; Folke, Carl; Reyers, Belinda (15 January 2015). “Planetary Boundaries – an update”. Stockholm Resilience Centre. Retrieved 19 April 2020.
  86. ^ “Ten years of nine planetary boundaries”. Stockholm Resilience Centre. November 2019. Retrieved 19 April 2020.
  87. ^ Persson, Linn; Carney Almroth, Bethanie M.; Collins, Christopher D.; Cornell, Sarah; de Wit, Cynthia A.; Diamond, Miriam L.; Fantke, Peter; Hassellöv, Martin; MacLeod, Matthew; Ryberg, Morten W.; Søgaard Jørgensen, Peter (1 February 2022). “Outside the Safe Operating Space of the Planetary Boundary for Novel Entities”. Environmental Science & Technology. 56 (3): 1510–1521. Bibcode:2022EnST…56.1510P. doi:10.1021/acs.est.1c04158. ISSN 0013-936X. PMC 8811958. PMID 35038861.
  88. ^ Ehrlich, P.R.; Holden, J.P. (1974). “Human Population and the global environment”. American Scientist. Vol. 62, no. 3. pp. 282–292.
  89. ^ Jump up to:a b c d Wiedmann, Thomas; Lenzen, Manfred; Keyßer, Lorenz T.; Steinberger, Julia K. (2020). “Scientists’ warning on affluence”. Nature Communications. 11 (1): 3107. Bibcode:2020NatCo..11.3107W. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-16941-y. ISSN 2041-1723. PMC 7305220. PMID 32561753. Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
  90. ^ Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis (PDF). Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.
  91. ^ TEEB (2010), The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature: A Synthesis of the Approach, Conclusions and Recommendations of TEEB
  92. ^ Jump up to:a b c Jaeger, William K. (2005). Environmental economics for tree huggers and other skeptics. Washington, DC: Island Press. ISBN 978-1-4416-0111-7. OCLC 232157655.
  93. ^ Groth, Christian (2014). Lecture notes in Economic Growth, (mimeo), Chapter 8: Choice of social discount rate. Copenhagen University.
  94. ^ UNEP, FAO (2020). UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. 48p.
  95. ^ Raworth, Kate (2017). Doughnut economics: seven ways to think like a 21st-century economist. London: Random House. ISBN 978-1-84794-138-1. OCLC 974194745.
  96. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e Berg, Christian (2017). “Shaping the Future Sustainably – Types of Barriers and Tentative Action Principles (chapter in: Future Scenarios of Global Cooperation—Practices and Challenges)”. Global Dialogues (14). Centre For Global Cooperation Research (KHK/GCR21), Nora Dahlhaus and Daniela Weißkopf (eds.). doi:10.14282/2198-0403-GD-14. ISSN 2198-0403.
  97. ^ Jump up to:a b c d Pickering, Jonathan; Hickmann, Thomas; Bäckstrand, Karin; Kalfagianni, Agni; Bloomfield, Michael; Mert, Ayşem; Ransan-Cooper, Hedda; Lo, Alex Y. (2022). “Democratising sustainability transformations: Assessing the transformative potential of democratic practices in environmental governance”. Earth System Governance. 11: 100131. Bibcode:2022ESGov..1100131P. doi:10.1016/j.esg.2021.100131.  Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
  98. ^ European Environment Agency. (2019). Sustainability transitions: policy and practice. LU: Publications Office. doi:10.2800/641030. ISBN 9789294800862.
  99. ^ Noura Guimarães, Lucas (2020). “Introduction”. The regulation and policy of Latin American energy transitions. Elsevier. pp. xxix–xxxviii. doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-819521-5.00026-7. ISBN 978-0-12-819521-5. S2CID 241093198.
  100. ^ Kuenkel, Petra (2019). Stewarding Sustainability Transformations: An Emerging Theory and Practice of SDG Implementation. Cham: Springer. ISBN 978-3-030-03691-1. OCLC 1080190654.
  101. ^ Fletcher, Charles; Ripple, William J.; Newsome, Thomas; Barnard, Phoebe; Beamer, Kamanamaikalani; Behl, Aishwarya; Bowen, Jay; Cooney, Michael; Crist, Eileen; Field, Christopher; Hiser, Krista; Karl, David M.; King, David A.; Mann, Michael E.; McGregor, Davianna P.; Mora, Camilo; Oreskes, Naomi; Wilson, Michael (4 April 2024). “Earth at risk: An urgent call to end the age of destruction and forge a just and sustainable future”. PNAS Nexus. 3 (4): pgae106. doi:10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae106. PMC 10986754. PMID 38566756. Retrieved 4 April 2024.  Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
  102. ^ Smith, E. T. (23 January 2024). “Practising Commoning”. The Commons Social Change Library. Retrieved 23 February 2024.
  103. ^ Jump up to:a b Haberl, Helmut; Wiedenhofer, Dominik; Virág, Doris; Kalt, Gerald; Plank, Barbara; Brockway, Paul; Fishman, Tomer; Hausknost, Daniel; Krausmann, Fridolin; Leon-Gruchalski, Bartholomäus; Mayer, Andreas (2020). “A systematic review of the evidence on decoupling of GDP, resource use and GHG emissions, part II: synthesizing the insights”. Environmental Research Letters. 15 (6): 065003. Bibcode:2020ERL….15f5003H. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ab842a. ISSN 1748-9326. S2CID 216453887.
  104. ^ Pigou, Arthur Cecil (1932). The Economics of Welfare (PDF) (4th ed.). London: Macmillan.
  105. ^ Jaeger, William K. (2005). Environmental economics for tree huggers and other skeptics. Washington, DC: Island Press. ISBN 978-1-4416-0111-7. OCLC 232157655.
  106. ^ Roger Perman; Yue Ma; Michael Common; David Maddison; James Mcgilvray (2011). Natural resource and environmental economics (4th ed.). Harlow, Essex: Pearson Addison Wesley. ISBN 978-0-321-41753-4. OCLC 704557307.
  107. ^ Jump up to:a b Anderies, John M.; Janssen, Marco A. (16 October 2012). “Elinor Ostrom (1933–2012): Pioneer in the Interdisciplinary Science of Coupled Social-Ecological Systems”. PLOS Biology. 10 (10): e1001405. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001405. ISSN 1544-9173. PMC 3473022.
  108. ^ “The Nobel Prize: Women Who Changed the World”. thenobelprize.org. Retrieved 31 March 2022.
  109. ^ Ghisellini, Patrizia; Cialani, Catia; Ulgiati, Sergio (15 February 2016). “A review on circular economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems”. Journal of Cleaner Production. Towards Post Fossil Carbon Societies: Regenerative and Preventative Eco-Industrial Development. 114: 11–32. Bibcode:2016JCPro.114…11G. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007. ISSN 0959-6526.
  110. ^ Nobre, Gustavo Cattelan; Tavares, Elaine (10 September 2021). “The quest for a circular economy final definition: A scientific perspective”. Journal of Cleaner Production. 314: 127973. Bibcode:2021JCPro.31427973N. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127973. ISSN 0959-6526.
  111. ^ Zhexembayeva, N. (May 2007). “Becoming Sustainable: Tools and Resources for Successful Organizational Transformation”. Center for Business as an Agent of World Benefit. Case Western University. Archived from the original on 13 June 2010.
  112. ^ “About Us”. Sustainable Business Institute. Archived from the original on 17 May 2009.
  113. ^ “About the WBCSD”. World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). Archived from the original on 9 September 2007. Retrieved 1 April 2009.
  114. ^ “Supply Chain Sustainability | UN Global Compact”. www.unglobalcompact.org. Retrieved 4 May 2022.
  115. ^ “”Statement of Faith and Spiritual Leaders on the upcoming United Nations Climate Change Conference, COP21 in Paris in December 2015″” (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 December 2015. Retrieved 21 March 2022.
  116. ^ “The Statement — Interfaith Climate”. www.interfaithclimate.org. Retrieved 13 August 2022.
  117. ^ McDilda, Diane Gow (2007). The everything green living book: easy ways to conserve energy, protect your family’s health, and help save the environment. Avon, Mass.: Adams Media. ISBN 978-1-59869-425-3. OCLC 124074971.
  118. ^ Gambino, Megan (15 March 2012). “Is it Too Late for Sustainable Development?”. Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved 12 January 2022.
  119. ^ Blühdorn (2017). “Post-capitalism, post-growth, post-consumerism? Eco-political hopes beyond sustainability”. Global Discourse. 7 (1): 42–61. doi:10.1080/23269995.2017.1300415. ISSN 2043-7897.
  120. ^ Watson, Bruce (20 August 2016). “The troubling evolution of corporate greenwashing”. The Guardian. Archived from the original on 18 October 2016.
  121. ^ “The Troubling Evolution Of Large Scale Corporate Greenwashing”. www.bloomberg.ca. BNN Bloomberg. 18 August 2018.
  122. ^ “The Troubling Evolution Of Large Scale Corporate Greenwashing”. The Conversation. 18 August 2011.
  123. ^ Ebrahimi Sirizi, Mohammad; Taghavi Zirvani, Esmaeil; Esmailzadeh, Abdulsalam; Khosravian, Jafar; Ahmadi, Reyhaneh; Mijani, Naeim; Soltannia, Reyhaneh; Jokar Arsanjani, Jamal (19 October 2023). “A scenario-based multi-criteria decision-making approach for allocation of pistachio processing facilities: A case study of Zarand, Iran”. Sustainability. 15 (20): 15054. doi:10.3390/su152015054. ISSN 2071-1050.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Translate »