Idea: Talk to the Amish.
Data: The Lehman's catalog.

I'm sorry, but my optimism gland is malfunctioning due to car accidents. (See New Scientist, October 22)

The problem with 'hard data' is that it is not useful at the local level. Anything that involves importation of resources is not sustainable. Period. Cities are not sustainable, cellphones, computers, windmills built from anything but wood and brass (things that can be smelted with wood fires) are not sustainable. The problem with being 'rational' about everything is that our value systems have all been co-opted by money. You cannot put a price on your great great grandchildren's birth defects, or their need for tantalum for semiconductors or their desires for diamonds, yet our accountants do just that. They compare the high profits of today to the low return on investment of leaving resources in the ground, and our offspring ALWAYS lose.
Before you can even BEGIN to use data to make these decisions, you first must decide the value of human beings to the future of the universe. What are people FOR, and HOW MANY do we need to do it?
THEN you can start to say we can use 'x' number of boobaroo-brazed,diamond-pointed drill bits to remove 'x' barrels of oil from the ground for 'x' number of years. Or that we can build 'x' number of windmills and solar panels with 'x' tons of 'x' elements from the periodic table, taken from lands in the Third World at the expense of their lifestyles.

Oh, did you mean 'economically' sustainable? In other words, NOT human or natural?

Sorry about the sarcasm, but I've been reading too much of Derrick Jensen's work. http://www.endgamethebook.org/

"Sustainable" means that what you do either is neutral with the environment, or has a Net Creative output for the future usefulness of the human race in the eyes of the universe. Our current cultures all are simply fabrications which allow us to rationalize simple existence, with no caveat that we are supposed to contribute something to nature in exchange for our consumption (Worshiping God for His Gift of Life? Talk about a marketing coup! "Pay me ten percent of everything you make and I will make your soul sustainable.").

'Sucking fewer resources for a longer time' is not sustainability. It's just denial that we are yeast in the petri dish, and the dish is already overflowing with our dying species.

Perhaps it will buy us more time to POSSIBLY figure out a purpose, but if nobody is looking for one, how, exactly, is that going to come about, and WHO is going to listen if someone DOES figure out useful purposes for the humans? Almost all of our religions teach people not to question such things, to 'have faith' that some magical sky buddy will guide us to the future like a 30 second commercial for a travel agent. If you don't know where you need to go, the travel agent can't help you.
The same applies to engineering and research and infrastructure for sustainability. If you don't know where sustainability is, you just end up going in circles, especially if everything is determined by profit and moneychangers. They are happy to watch you spin your wheels because every revolution pays them interest on the money you (and the government) borrow to spin your wheels.

"If you want Change, keep it in your pocket. Spending money just votes for the money."

http://www.bikesatwork.com/carfree/carfree-census-database.html

Some other potential metrics;
- Auto Miles traveled per year
- Percentage non-car commutes
- Number of car trips per day per household
- Average/Standard Deviation of distance from subway stop (or daily destinations such as grocery, school, etc)
- GDP local production (within 200 miles) per capita
- Agriculture local production (within 200 miles) per capita

Interesting other links, though not strictly empirical data;
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_carfree_places
- http://www.carfree.com/

Visit www.cities21.org and talk with Steve Raney. He is an expert in this field.

In the past I have worked on something called the "US City Rankings" - check out http://howgreenisyourcity.com for the print version.

Also reach out to Warren Karlenzig at http://greenacity.com/

You should check out the following data sources we used:

Metro congestion - Texas Transportation Institute (latest data released 9/07)

Sprawl Index - SmartGrowth America (latest data released 2002?)

If you have questions about the above study, send me a message.

Cheers.
Ken

Data does matter. It's the best way that you can measure any kind of change. It's also the best way to paint a picture of a community. If you can't get it at the local level (and many times that's true), try getting it at the State level.

Most States keep very good data regarding agriculture and health. For health and behavior indicators (i.e. eating fruits and vegetables, excercising, and TV watching) go to Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS - every State has one). Your state office may even be willing to "localize" the survey; giving you information regarding certain counties and regions.

While not specifically addressing sustainability, BRFSS does address behaviors in the community that are affected by and indeed affect policies regarding sustainability.

Lesa Dixon-Gray

First they ignore you,
Then they laugh at you,
Then they fight you,
Then you win.
~Mahatma Gandhi

There's also the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry - they also have a site for Climate Change and Public Health. I'm betting they'll have a Peak Oil and Public Health site up by the end of 2008 (their leader just published a great article on the subject in the Journal of the American Medical Association).

Lesa Dixon-Gray

First they ignore you,
Then they laugh at you,
Then they fight you,
Then you win.
~Mahatma Gandhi

Municipal water systems will have data on monthly usage, sometimes even broken down between commercial and residential customers.

Municipal wastewater treatment districts may have data on volumes of wastewater treated per month. If they are running anything through anaerobic digesters to produce methane (they should, if "sustainable" means anything at all), then data on methane production should also be available.

Municipal refuse collection and landfill systems should have some data available on the volume of refuse collected (it should be decreasing as a community moves toward sustainability). They should also have data on the volume of materials collected in their recycling programs (this is a particularly significant sustainability metric).

Municipal street departments, county or state highway systems, or regional planning agencies might have data on sidewalks, trails, and pathways for pedestrians, and on bike lanes, paths, and trails. They might also have data on the amount of vehicular traffic.

Municipal parks & recreation departments should have some data available on the acreage of public parkland and greenspace within the district. Looking at larger regions (counties, say), one might also need to check state and federal forest, park, and wildlife agencies for properties under their jurisdiction.

The above will most likely either administer or be in contact with the organization that administers any community gardens in the area. The amount of acreage under cultivation and number of participants is an important metric.

To get a handle on the amount of farmland being worked, numbers of people working in agriculture, and agricultural production in the surrounding area - including types of crops grown, start with your local Cooperative Extension office. They will either have or be able to connect you with a wealth of data.

State and federal wildlife agencies should have some information on the status of protected wildlife and wildlife habitats within the area.

There may be a local or state agency that monitors local air quality, and thus would have some data for you. For example, here in WNC ozone is an issue, and there are monitoring stations with online real time and historical data.

If you are looking for any local economic data, your local Chamber of Commerce is the place to start. If it exists, they'll have it.

For any population data that you can't get from the Census bureau, try your local public health agency. They should have data on local birth rates & death rates.

The electric and natural gas utilities serving the community just might possibly have data on the amounts of electricity and natural gas supplied to the community each month. Getting a handle on heating oil, propane, gasoline, and other fuels is more challenging - perhaps the local government of Chamber of Commerce could be persuaded to conduct a survey?

Getting a handle on the installed capacity of renewable energy systems (wind, solar, etc.) is difficult, but there may be a local or state agency compiling this data. Start with the local Chamber of Commerce, then maybe your state's energy office. There might also be some local green building or green energy groups around that might know how to find this data.

NOAA maintains local data on heating and cooling degree days, number of days of sunshine, precipitation, etc.

The USGS maintains some data on local watersheds at water.usgs.gov

It seems to me ironic but in the city you don't really need a car but in the country you can't live without one. City life is however unsustainable and country life is not due to low density and possibility of subsistence farming/gardening and raising of rabbits, etc. for meat. In the city we live vertically. If a house is too high then you need elevators and water and sewage has to have electric pumps as well and gas heating and electric systems are needed.

Some could argue that these are needed anyway and that the per capita costs are lower in a city , it being so much more efficient to store people by the million in apartment buildings and bundle sewage costs, have huge water works, etc. Some would say then that an optimal city size is 100,000-300,000 or similar or perhaps 30,000-50,000 all depending on technology and they would make compaerisons to towns in 19th century. http://www.trivia-library.com/a/15-cities-with-largest-population.htm A million people lived in cities back then. Now we have infrastructure built out so we could keep the people there instead of destroying the countryside by returning them all to village life. Evacuating the city to the countryside or the suburbs to the city are a couple of suggestions. For example if the city is more efficient for living and more environmentally friendly in a complete sense and using city dwellers as seasonal farm labour to bring in the crops and plant it might work somewhat, eliminating most suburbs and bringing farmland back to the edges of the cities so that regional food supply would be acessible and reliable.

Population density would have to be higher, mixed zoning typical. Essentially even small towns would have to retun to this pattern. A white picket fence and your own plot of land is a relative luxury when it takes arable land away from the community, thereby ensuring hunger. This was realistic with a smaller population but must be anbandoned except where the land is used intensively for gardening and/or plots are very small.

Obviously a country boy ain't gonna like this message and a city boy either and miost especially as suburban who treaures his "best of both worlds". but if the city boys become Mutant Zombie Bikers roaming the countryside raping and pillaging this will help noone so a new model has to be developed where all cooperate. There will not exist a national market for fruits and vegetables anymore but only for grains and cattle due to the freshness factor. So reional production of produce will be critical and a return to regional cuisine and culture in this sense (catfish and watermelon anyone?).

“Without a video the people perish”-Is. 13:24

I glanced at the NYC plan and find that being in Habmurg they have a similar plan for energy which is a bit of a laugh. Anyway, one city cnanot do it in isolation, perhaps the norhteast USA/Canada could attempt it as codependenca on the surrounding area and specialization is critical. It is certainly a good start of course and NYC is always a rollmodel (I think of Rudi Giuliani's role model effect worldwide with policing methods for cities). The next step would have to a New York/New England plan for sustainability and say in a couple of years in light of massive energy price increases/shortages this seems likely to actually occur quicker than we think. I give it 5 years till the coasts start to work together in the same way as they are doing now already in climate concerns. The more conservative regions will drag their feet on topics which could in anyway go against individual right to have a bigger car, plot of land. Essentially if the left wing forces this stuff through at the local level in the liberal states they will have an advantage against the "flyover states" and lead the pack. The obvious logic of the solution will however be obvious to everyone in a few years and gain momentum winning the day by middecade 2010s.

“Without a video the people perish”-Is. 13:24

Data comes later if I can find it:

Percentage of population within 1000ft of non-traffic-deterred mass transit. (utility goes up as the square of this number)
Percentage of population within 1000ft of traffic-deterred mass transit.
Bike ownership rates.
Recycling rates.
Energy use per capita in residential zonings.
Energy use per acre in agricultural zonings.
Energy use per square foot of space in industrial/commercial zonings.
At the local zoning office, divide residential and commercial via lines. The dimensionless ratio of the total line length to the area of whichever is larger provides a measure of homogeneity: The Zone Mix Factor(tm). ZMF is either a number or the word "completely," indicating nonexclusive zoning.
Trade balance

Local data on sustainability is going to be hard to find at a national level. There is exploding change taking place in the United States and most persons are unaware of this underground movement. This revolution is the return to local food production, chemical free farming, and solar power.

The reason you will not find hard data is because this movement intentionally avoids Federal Government notice, which would like to put a stop to it. Some examples of government activity against grass roots food production.

a. The Center of Disease Control is on National Public Radio stating that the bird flue disease vector will be facilitated not by corporate factory farms but by backyard chicken flocks.

b. The Department of Agriculture is attempting through grants, coercion, and threats to document every chicken, lamb, goat, cow, and even blueberry bushes through the National Animal Identification System. Government has only two purposes in registration. Taxation and/or confiscation.

c. The Food and Drug administration has a long history of supporting corporate farming by creating food labeling laws that allow glutamate to be used under the description of "spice" and "natural flavorings." Glutamate is very harmful to the human nervous system.

d. Many Federal agencies work against the availability of raw milk, Nature's best source of vitamin D and A and many other nutrients that are necessary to human health.

Food is the basic foundation of all civilization, so that any discussion of sustainability must begin here. Part of this hidden revolution of which I speak is a departure, still in its infancy, away from petroleum. The future will be powered by photovoltaics, firewood, ethanol, wind power, mules, horses, and oxen, and to a lesser degree by methane and hydrogen. And for all you folks who pay to do physical work at the health club, do not discount human physical work. All this will be supported by the lead acid battery, possibly the most recycled item on the planet. How do I know this future? Because I am already strongly forging a path in that direction. Join me in this successful future.

solarfamilyfarm.com

This may be of interest ....

http://postcarboncities.net/guidebook

For transportation, I would use VMT per capita which is available by city from the Federal Highway Administration.
http://trb.metapress.com/content/k86304w451160775/

Electricity consumption by source is available by utility from the Department of Energy.

WGB

I don't have any data, but please don't beat me over the head for that.

I live and toil in Oklahoma, and am mis-represented in the Senate by Jim Inhofe. We have built a group which is working on their own sustainability while trying to spread the word on the whole variety of sustainability issues. Tulsa, Oklahoma City and Norman have adopted the Mayor's group sustainability plans, which we consider significant because it would be impossible to have urban sustainability without the government participation. We have developed programs for Buy Fresh, Buy Local which, although originating in other places, have to be implemented locally. We have nine Chapters spread across the State, and are working on more. We have an annual conference which I hope to get adapted to the larger "fair" setting of MN, WI, and others. Just as all sustainability must be local, it involves some innovation as to gain acceptance as we have experienced in OK.

Working on State goals, and local action, could be enhanced by regional groups, since, for one example, just as a lot of the mercury deposited in the US comes from Asia, ours is spread to the East by the same winds which brought Asia's pollution to us. CA's spreads to AZ, AZ's to NM, NM's to OK, etc. The solutions may be local, but the problems are across the country and the world.

Just some observations, but it takes the whole chain for us to effectively pull together.

Most of the data for sustainability is simply historical fact that we can seek and use. Variations for modern scientific knowledge and better tools should be applied, but it goes something like this:

1 man without powered assistance can work and tend 1 acre of land (42,000 ft^2), providing food for a small family in the process.
1 man with a mule can tend some 20 acres (about half of which is grazing for the mule) and sell enough to provide for mule habitat and replacement mules periodically.

Various soils, tools, wind power, climate changes, etc., can adjust these numbers, but they are the basic starting point for civilization. Hunter-gatherers use more land per person, but need fewer people. Variations of the theme can be used as grassland/savannah management, etc.

For sustainable cities to exist, they would need to provide usefulness to the surrounding land in exchange for food. In a food-short society, I'm pretty sure the farmers don't need advertising agencies, investment advisers, or telephone salesmen. They DO need doctors, scientists, plumbers, writers, etc., to protect the world from asteroids, to support the best systems of land management, and if for no other reason, to provide humanure. Labor could help instead of making farmers enslave 14 children (my grandparents) in order to feed the city dwellers.