In this extreme, information overload age, it's often difficult to separate the truths from the non-truths. This is prevalent in many aspects of everyday life and sustainable living is no exception. We are sometimes left with many unanswered and debatable questions like, paper or plastic? cloth diapers or disposable diapers? new Prius vs. old reliable vehicle? local food or organic food? Wine in a box or wine in a glass bottle?* I hear from people regularly that say they just don't know what to believe, or what to do to live lighter on the planet.

These decisions are often compounded by financial anxiety. Won't this gadget or life style cost more? This is a popular counter tool for any organization that has an interest in discounting the merits of any individual or group adopting more sustainable behaviors.

Recently, the New York Times published an article about green building that read as a short discussion to end the discussion on pursuing better building practices...end of discussion. Upon further investigation, we discover that the article was based on a report by the Commercial Real Estate Development Association or NAIOP. According to Architecture 2030, "This disinformation campaign is obviously meant to stall, confuse and distort."

More from Architecture 2030...

...