Regarding "The Next Industrial Revolution" I may try to get you a copy phil, as my aunt was the director, but really you should see it to understand the McDonough approach. He's not in the expansionist mold, because his entire basis for sustainability is in closed loops. He has two loops - the natural, and the technical (or chemical, artificial, what-have-you). It can adapt to APPEAR expansionist because, as long as the loop is closed, it can increase in size righ up to the finite limit (and that does NOT meaning using everything for human consumption, but leaving plenty for the ecosphere - one should see the film if possible). I find it an intriguing compromise between the needs of the earth and the current system. The loops work so well because you don't pollute - everything technical must reused, and this is not just babble but he's done this. And, of course, the natural is self-explanatory. To site some examples of each, let's look at two swiss companies he's worked with - a textile manufacturer and a paper mill.
If you know about paper mills, you know that they used thousands of chemicals, and pollute an enormous amount. Well, McDonough's company weeded out most of those chemicals, changed the way the process worked, recaptured the chems that were used, and the short of it is, when Swiss EPAish inspectors came to check the water entering and leaving the plant, they thought their machines were broken because the water exiting was actually CLEANER than that going in. Everything remained in the loop.
The textile is even more amazing. There were upwards of 2000 chems being used to create the fabrics, and of those, only 16 were found to be non-damaging (the whole thing was difficult to work, because almost all chem producers won't show you what goes into what they put out, just say "it's proprietary" and "it's legal" which is of course very different from being safe, but he eventually found two that would open their books - a Japanese firm that said, if money could be saved, great, and a Swiss one, which was looking from a more directly environmental angle) The reason McDonough was hired to fix the textiles is because the trimmings (every textile has to trim both ends of haggly stuff) was considered toxic and the plant was gonna hafta shut down. Long story again short, after they found the 16 safe chems and determined they could create all the colors with the same vibrancy using only them, after the changes were implemented, the clippings became fertilizer for farms (or could just start compost heaps, which they also did). That's the kinda loop that we're lookin at, and he's got a ton more examples, including working with Nike and, at the moment, he's redesigning the Ford River Rouge Plant (the father of all factories after). This includes not just makin the factory enviro-friendly, but the product as well - meanin he's at work on an eco-friendly car, from the fabric in the seat to the chassis. He's not workin on the combustion engine - that's got enough other stuff goin at it - but he's gonna have the rest of the car ready for the time when hydrogen becomes economical. When that project is complete, look for a lot more talk about this guy. A lot. Some of the stuff is just so simple - like the problem with rainwater, when it gets washed to the river in minutes via drainage systems, it picks up all sorts of nasties which get into the water. His solution - a grass roof. What rushed in minutes now takes days - what was once nasty nitrogen is now fertilizer (what's bad in one ecosystem is food in another). Plus, ya get a little more carbon-suckin out of it. He's got other places with entire gardens on the roof, trees and all. Added benefit - temperature moderator, you need less heat or AC in winter and summer. That's on the way just about everywhere, methinks.
I agree that commodifying nature is the next step on the political ladder, and it has already begun - many groups site things like "You save x dollars now, but the damage is estimated at xsquared" or such things, and the recognition that enviro-cost is bein unfairly written off. However, workin with such a step, I see a closed loop system - eliminating the concept of waste, perhaps McDonough's biggest contribution to the effort in the long run - as bein an important component. The great thing is, his vision is just startin to get really big - like you see from the garden rooves, it's not a large leap to creating buildings that are ecospheres themselves, ending encroachment by intregration. Exciting stuff, really - and I think we can all agree it is not expansionist. It does not chew up and spit out. A quote, near-quote really, from memory: "You can't say you don't grow something, you always grow something, it's just a question of what do you want to grow? Do you want to grow sickness, or do you want to grow health? Do you want to grow belching poisonous machines that use up resources at thousands of times the rate they were placed in the ground, or do you want to use renewables that contribute and give back to the world from which they come? Do you want to grow separation, or do you want to grow integration? Do you want to grow life, or do you want to grow death?"
Mike, this sorta thing goes deep into where you going, which I might add is wonderful territory. I am always flitting amongst these ideas, and have quite spotty downright hypocritical application. For instance, always said I'd never own a conventional-engined car; then I moved out to the boonies, and my girlfriend gave me one, and now I do (sidenote: good to shut the engine at lights, but do be sure to warm the car up cold mornings - if you start driving while the engine is still cool, you don't fully burn the fuel and the stuff belched in a semi-solid state is much much worse pollution than leavin your car idling for 2 minutes, probably less). Also, I should add into my vegatarianism, I don't think there's anything wrong with eating meat (and even if I did I would never try to stop someone else). Rather, I think it's the system we have now that is wrong. Quite wasteful, quite overdone for us westerners, quite separated from the spirit of the animal and the knowledge of the sacrifice being made. Eatin like a Native American, huntin what you need and using it all, saying a prayer over the slain animal as thanks for its gift to you, this is fine and I could see myself being comfortable in such a situation. Plastic-wrapped red substances, this is a problem for me, more than the death involved (as death is part of all natural cycles, and can be fine if not abused as we humans do). Still, I do like to try and extend such thoughts - I try to share of myself as well sometimes. When a fly comes to lick the salt from my sweat, instead of reaching for the swatter I just observe the way it cleans its head and legs, and enjoy the tickle (it's really a pleasant sensation, if you don't have the immediate revulsion that most people have). I even tried not to kill any mosquitoes, and let a few suck away at me, until I learned that they carry a fatal disease out here. I'm not ready to equate my life with that of a mosquito (well, really, many mosquitoes, as now I kill them when I find them, unless I am outdoors, in which case I just pay attention to where they are and try to feel them bite, a great exercise in itself for attention and concentration, as you can ALWAYS feel it - just mostly we don't pay attention to such a small thing) but I can see myself gettin to a place where I do feel that, the mosquito or me, life is life and I am no judge.
As far as commercialism goes, that's such a huge thing that I haven't really attempted to tackle it. Every time I do look at it, I feel that I soon won't be able to buy anything - please let me know what you find out, as I could use guidance on this and I would like to attempt, if it is possible. Must say, very happy to hear you talkin about things like this tho...