In some respects, the implications set forth by sustainable development is the suggestion that it's increasingly difficult for you to sustain yourself. Society will have fewer guarantees about sustaining you, and will instead focus efforts on being able to sustain some part of itself in the future. Your participation is less important than it once was, as it will be better able to continue without you.
Do you need to sustain yourself? Are you inherently sustainable? How could that be completely assured? What will I need to have in place? Is the transformation necessary to achieve sustainability be sustainable for the current eaters? Are they sinful? Can we judge them, and rationalize their demise, and our lack of sympathy? Or are we just better off avoiding the inclination to even consider it, as the benefits of any genuine progress far outweighs, and any of the incidental human costs, such as sending people to an early grave by diminshing their access to society, or diminishing the value they can derive from any resource?
Surely, at that point, one has to make the case that those whom we identify as being expected to suffer from the effects of the transformation (higher energy costs, loss of jobs, less access to nutrition, increased rate of aging and disease) will actually do better (cleaner air, fewer disasters, less crime, new technology, miracle food and medicines) thus there is no valid criticism. We have to establish that the net effect is most certainly a diminshed range of vital existence.
We can get there if you make the same sacrifice I do. And I will tell you specifically what sacrifice that is. If I am a true believer, and I benefit from the issue being serious, then am I really making a sacrifice?
What is my sacrifice? Do I truly expect to have les? Do climate activists live in the smallest houses and avoid traveling? Do they eat foods they find bland or undesirable? Do they avoid hot showers and having a comfortable temperature in their homes?
If a change is coming which necessitates technological and industry changes, then the activists, who concerns themselves with all things social, isn't expecting that they themselves will have to make research discoveries to make and replace products. Their modus operandi is to demand the producers to spend more money in order to meet the particular demands, all under an assumption that there are infinite resources available behind the discretion of certain companies and if they'd listen to our ideas then we would have resources more readily available.
If, indeed, I am a part of the apparatus that tests the very latest discoveries, then it stands to reason that I may be first to benefit. If it is not widespread enough,t he same drive is leading to its greater form and availability to a later date. Surely, if the mechanism to demand is powerful enough, then my affiliation works in so many ways, not just to my own benefit from others as well.
Standing among the most adamant of those demadning it, and among those who most intelligently explicate the need for it, and among those who represent the peak of sophistication. Surely I will at least be one of the relatively earlier adopters. Surely, mankind must do this to survive and if some loss occurs through transition to sustainability, I will be one of those who makes it, since I am most aligned with it.