Lloyd 1

Strider Lloyd

Professor Wolf

RS 301

10 December 2008

Final Paper

I am not an environmentalist. I don’t live in a house made of recycled newspaper

and tires. I have never handcuffed myself to a tree, and I don’t grow organic lettuce. In fact,

most of the time, living a regenerative lifestyle does not seem attractive. And yet, despite my

apparent resistance, it is hard not to question my position when I consider the serious

environmental predicament that we are in. Generally, I prefer to avoid hype and drama,

preferring instead to rebel with a divergent opinion or ignore the issue completely. This is

what I have done with the issues of environmental degradation and sustainability. This

situation is different; my initial research has shown that the conversation has changed, or as

Claire Cummings puts it in her essay, Ripe for Change: Agricultures Tipping Point,

“something happens to raise the stakes. Now, lumbering onto center stage comes a real

monster, global warming, and the conflict shifts from being about how we feed ourselves to

whether we survive at all.” (1) I find Cumming’s statement provocative; she succeeds in

capturing the gravity of our current global environmental problem, by introducing

agriculture and food production as a vehicle for provocation and analysis. What better way

to capture interest than to question one’s own mortality.

In essence, there is currently a growing environmental movement that is focused on

regenerative lifestyle and sustainable processes. This movement is evidenced by the

increased media coverage, and subsequent social awareness, and interest in environmental
 Lloyd 2

discourse. I think the environmental hype is due in part to the confusing nature of

sustainability. To begin with, I was not able to find a firm, and universally accepted

definition for sustainable, regenerative development. Essentially, these processes can be

defined in many ways; the one that I prefer to use is that of the World Commission on

Environment and Development: “development that meets the needs of the present world

without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

Furthermore, I was not able to find compelling evidence of reliable testing methods that

produced consistent and quantifiable results that could gauge success, failure, or progress.

With all this in mind, my sense of the situation, is that definitions, principles, and even

conceptions, of regenerative and sustainable processes are still being developed, but at the

core, an associated lifestyle is centered on the health of human societies and the natural

environment.

Some might say that this view is naive, optimistic, or even diluted, but I contend that

they are being reactionary. The truth is that the ecological problems humans face are huge

and people are scared. Climate change is the biggest challenge that we face in the world

today and many people either don’t understand the causal relationship a sustainable versus a

consumption based, degenerative lifestyle. It is already leading to significant changes in the

world’s physical environment. For instance, extreme weather events are becoming more

frequent, glaciers are melting, ocean ice and snow cover are declining. Global warming has

already driven up mean sea levels by 110-20 centimeters during the last 100 years, and this

is forecast to rise by up to another 88 centimeters by 2100. Furthermore, the ozone layer is

depleting, territories are being polluted, deforested, turned into barren wasteland, or some

combination thereof.
 Lloyd 3

In Sustainable Development: The Challenge for Community Development, Dorothy

Gamble supportively asserts:

These and other problems have caused wide recognition of the need to

pursue development strategies that are supportive of both people and

the planet. The concept is elegant, but it is not simple; and it has

evolved from contributions in various disciplines and social

movements. (210)

I can’t say definitely, but based upon my research, I believe that Dorothy Gamble would

agree that with the publication of his book, Regenerative Design for Sustainable

Development and his founding of the Regenerative Studies program at California State

Polytechnic University, Pomona; Professor John T. Lyle, has made many such

contributions; strategies that help to clarify the meaning of regenerative, and sustainable

development.

Basically, this situation boils down to an investigation of the ecological opportunities

and constraints that are associated with the divergent practices associated with industrial

systems and regenerative systems. Lyle introduces and defines these systems as follows:

Industrial systems are the products of recent Western technology in its purest

form, shaped by engineering criteria that seek high levels of productivity and

operational efficiency to the virtual exclusion of other concerns. Therein lies

their utility and occasional grandiose beauty – and their incipient failure.

Regenerative systems by contrast are enmeshed in natural and social

processes in ways that make their purposes far more complex. While

technology remains the means for augmenting nature, it ideally becomes a

 Lloyd 4

factor within the larger social and ecological context rather than the engine

driving that complex. (37)

Lyle then proceeds to offer the following twelve design strategies that he believes can be

used to mitigate the constraints associated with the unbalanced application of Industrial

processes:

• Letting nature do the work

• Considering nature as both model and context

• Aggregating, not isolating

• Seeking optimum levels for multiple functions, not the maximum or

minimum level for any use

• Matching technology to need

• Using information to replace power

• Providing multiple pathways

• Seeking common solutions to disparate problems

• Managing storage as a key to sustainability

• Shaping form to guide flow

• Shaping form to manifest process

• Prioritizing for sustainability

With these principles in mind, it is the intent of this thesis to determine some of the

challenges associated with our current environmental situation and explore the factors that

lead to current regenerative and degenerative practices. This study examines the theory and

practice of regenerative development and how these concepts relate to sustainable lifestyles.
 Lloyd 5

My goal is to increase my knowledge and better understand these issues by investigating,

what I think is the interactive relationship that exists between common practices associated

with the following fields: energy, atmosphere, shelter, water, food, and waste.

Here is the situation as I see it with energy. Fossil fuels are amazing! They are

instantaneous, cheap, eternal, portable, easily stored, and extremely dense with potential

energy, and it is this potential energy that gives fossil fuels all the propertied that humans

enjoy. For example, fossil fuels free us from our dependence on nature by allowing us to

control our environment. They allow us to: travel, live wherever we want. Unfortunately,

our global population has rapidly increased, and a consumption based paradigm has evolved

where societies have disproportionably relied on an industrial model for energy creation and

use. In other words, we are a global society that is dependent on fossil fuels for energy. The

problem is that fossil fuel amounts are finite and decreasing rapidly. After reviewing the

presentation by Philip Wolf, titled, An Overview of World Energy Statistics, it is my

temporary conclusion that: world energy usage and consumption has increased, energy per

dollar per production has decreased, oil reserves are depleting, and my society, the United

States uses a disproportionate amount of oil. The simple truth is that the more energy you

consume, the higher your material standard of living. It is my sense that, these facts speak

to the nature of our difficult situation, a situation that challenges us to abandon the

conveniences of the industrial model, and adopt the regenerative model. The challenge is to

increase awareness, patience, empathy, tolerance, and social awareness.

These unbalanced energy policies make sense when you consider the inherent

advantages associated with the industrial model. As previously mentioned, industrial

processes are productive and efficient, and that is crucial when you consider the
 Lloyd 6

conveniences associated with fossil fuel based energy. Conversely, it is important to

carefully consider the hugely destructive effects fossil fuel consumption has on our fragile

ecosystem. With this in mind, I think it is appropriate to apply Lyle’s principle #1, Letting

Nature do the Work to the field of energy. Practically speaking, this theory maintains that

many of the mechanical and industrialized processes can be replaced with regenerative

processes that are preformed by nature. (38) This transition could be performed by using the

following methods of energy production: solar, hydroelectric, wind, tidal, and nuclear. I

have thought about this transition and have temporarily concluded that, considering the

selfish and obtuse nature of humanity, this transition is not just difficult, but near impossible.

It will take a huge event or disaster to motive people for change.

The next principle of Lyle’s that I would apply to the field of energy is #10, Shaping

Form to Guide Flow. This principle basically says that energy and material flow through

systems, within the physical medium of the environment, and that determines the rate of

flow. Based upon my research, I interpret the form as the method, or construct that delivers

and transforms the natural resource, and the flow is the resultant product, or energy. Lyle

simplifies it to, “flow follows form follows flow.” (43) The fact is that there are five forms

of energy: mechanical, chemical, radiant, electrical, and nuclear, and any form of energy can

be converted to another form. ( ) I think this principle could be applied to the energy field

with the use physics and engineering. Considering the interactive properties that exist

between these forms of energy, there has to be a form that will produce energy in a

nonpolluting way. Lyle mentions controlling the flow of water and air; maybe there is a

way to use form to increase the speed of water and air, thereby increasing the energy output.
 Lloyd 7

It seems appropriate to follow the field of energy with that of the atmosphere;

especially, considering the causal relationship between the two. It is my informed opinion

that since the industrial revolution, mankind has released massive amounts of gases into the

atmosphere, which essentially trap heat and create what is commonly referred to as “The

Greenhouse Effect.” ( ) Once again, industrial processes such as burning fossil fuels,

chemical production, deforestation, and livestock production, have combined to release

dangerous levels of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide into the atmosphere. Once

these gases are released into the atmosphere, they act as barriers, trapping heat and warming

the planet. The World Meteorological Organization supports this contention with the

following statistics:

The United States releases twenty tons of carbon monoxide per person per

year. Nine out of the ten warmest years in the instrumental record have

occurred since 1990. The global average surface temperature in 2002 was

approximately 0.5 degrees Celsius above the 1961-90 averages and replaced

by the 2001 record as the second warmest on record.

Our developing global warming situation presents a difficult challenge for humanity because

the implications from a gas enriched atmosphere are difficult to quantify. Theory exists that

supports the idea that even slight global temperature increases will have extraordinary

climactic consequences. The challenge is to establish a causal link and quantify the effects

of certain gasses on the atmosphere. This is only the beginning, once the data is acquired,

then comes the difficult task of informing and educating the right people; selfless people

with vision and the power to direct legislation.

 Lloyd 8

Based upon the nature of the aforementioned atmospheric challenge, it seems

appropriate to apply Lyle’s principle #12, Prioritizing for Sustainability, to our situation.

This principle basically says that there has been a slow increase in regenerative and

sustainable design in the past decade, yet we are in an extended period of transition in which

our priorities must change. (45) Basically, this problem is being realized. Scientists have

measure statistics that support the idea that certain climatic events and situations are a result

of our atmospheric pollution. I strongly believe that to succeed in solving the atmospheric

problem, sustainable processes and regenerative design must take a high priority throughout

all sectors of society. People with access to policy makers in government positions should

focus on emerging technologies, with an emphasis on there cost saving potential.

Another of Lyle’s principles that would apply effectively to the atmosphere problem

is #9, Managing Storage as a Key to Sustainability. This principle describes how

maintaining adequate storage and balancing the rate of release and replenishment, with the

rate of use, are important keys to creating and maintaining a successful regenerative

community. Lyle argues that nature has available storage devises in groundwater basins and

the atmosphere for oxygen and other gasses. (43) In the publication, Lyle briefly addresses

the atmosphere with the claim that “All natural processes have their storages: groundwater

basins for water; the atmosphere for oxygen, nitrogen, and other gasses.” I would apply this

principle because, as Lyle suggests, the atmosphere is a natural storage facility for gasses,

just not at the rate we are releasing them. So, it follows that if we could store the gasses and

release them slower, we could mitigate the atmospheric problems.

Water is another field that could be addressed with Lyle’s principles. Water is the

most precious natural resource on the planet. Every living organism needs water in order to
 Lloyd 9

survive. If water becomes polluted, it not only loses its value, but can become toxic.

Surprisingly, although most people understand this concept and recognize the increased

water pollution, the issue is disregarded, and pollution continues in our rivers, lakes, and

oceans. Maybe they think dilution is the pollution solution, which may have been the case

hundreds of years ago when our population was lower, or maybe it is just an out of sight out

of mind philosophy. Regardless of which, water availability and quality are very real

concerns in modern society. Out of all the available water on earth, only 3% of it is

considered “fresh” water, and 77% of this “fresh” water is frozen which basically means that

there is a limited amount of water available for human use. ( ) The water challenge is once

again, the abandonment of the industrial model of water use, and this is difficult considering

the significant role water plays in almost every aspect of production. The challenge also

includes in depth filtration research and the systematic identification and categorization of

pathogens.

I would apply Lyle’s principle #8, Seeking Common Solutions to Disparate

Problems, to our water problem. The idea of this principle is that instead of separating and

compartmentalizing systems and resources, we need to recognize and utilize their respective

interconnectivities to create more effective processes. Lyle emphasizes the identification of

system interactions and solutions that exist within the same system. (42) The application

that comes to mind is our water management systems. To the best of my knowledge, water

is currently managed as either: supple water, storm water, or waste water. Unfortunately, in

an effort maximize profit and increase market share, our current industrial system treats

these three distinctions as separate entities. It is my temporary conclusion that these systems
 Lloyd 10

have the potential to be interconnected, which would increase effective management, and

efficiency; ultimately reducing water waste, use, and pollution.

I think that Lyle’s principle #6, Using Information to Replace Power, is a necessary

step in applying Lyle’s eighth principle that seeks common solutions to disparate problems.

I mean, it makes sense that increased information would help to identify weaknesses and

possible solutions. This principle suggests the causative value and associated benefits

associated with maintaining open lines of communication and a feedback monitoring

system. Lyle argues that both allow for greater information sharing, which facilitates better

management decisions and community involvement. (41) I agree with Lyle and consider

honest, clear, and thoughtful communication to be at least part of the solution to any

problem

I find the field of waste to be the most interesting, and sometimes revolting. The

industrial model is again the main factor that has created our current waste practices and the

resulting environmental problems. Basically, the industrial waste process is based on the

notion that waste management is a self contained process, where you use something, there is

something left over that you throw away, so you can proceed to use more. Based upon my

research, I think waste is a problem in part, because of the selfish, belligerent nature of how

we consume, and partly because of our increasing population. The main challenge with

waste is the dearth of disposal choices. It is my understanding that those options are as

follows: bury, burn, dump in water, recycle, and natural assimilation into the biosphere.

Lyle’s principle #2, Considering Nature as a Model, can, and is being applied

effectively in the field of waste management. I interpret Lyle’s principle to suggest that

when developing a successful and effective system or environment, using nature as a design
 Lloyd 11

model helps to re-establish the connectivity and continuity that makes nature successful.

(39) I think Lyle is suggesting that nature represents a perfect system, and if we use nature

as a model for design, and lifestyle, we are allowed an arcane glimpse of the universe, that

hopefully allows greater insight into how the underlying structure and flow of a system will

affect our ecosystem. Our current sewage treatment process is an interesting mix of

industrial and regenerative design. It is industrial in the sense that is is broken down into

separate and efficient steps, but nature was used as a model for how waste is treated within

the context of its relative step in the process. The process is broken down into the following

eight steps: water introduced, gravity separates large debris, screen for finer grit, settle with

primary clarification, introduce air for bacterial activity, let settle, disinfect with chlorine,

ultraviolet light, or ozone and then pump it back into nature. It is my temporary conclusion

that these steps are functionally the same as the steps that occur in a stream. This is how

nature does it, but we do it more compactly. In my opinion, while I agree we are making

progress in this field, the challenge is going to be about how we continue research that will

not only increase the efficiency of this system, but maybe find mutually beneficial

applications for waste that are completely regenerative.

Another compelling application of Lyle’s principles to the waste field is that of

principle #5, Matching Technology to Need. The interesting thing about applying this

principle to the waste process is that I am applying it in a conceptual manner, where I don’t

associate matching the technology to the need of a waste systems, but using a waste

conscious mindset to match technology to other systems. I interpret this principle as a

strategy that uses creativity, knowledge, and abstract thought when determining and

applying best technologies for the right systems. Based upon my initial research, I agree
 Lloyd 12

that Lyle’s nuclear power example is effective in presenting the basic idea of this principle,

but I think that there might be another level to this principle. Consider how nuclear

development and plant design might improve with a directed effort to apply technology to

the main drawback of nuclear power, the radioactive waste. Forget clean coal, which sounds

like an oxymoron to me, and consider the profound benefits of nuclear power with

technologically advanced and safe waste management. I am envisioning a Manhattan

Project scenario, which seems unlikely now but who knows, it never hurts to dream.

The human population is growing at an unprecedented rate; according to Wikipedia,

As of November 8, 2008, the world’s population is estimated to be about 6.7 billion, and

that on average, the world’s population is growing by about 1.14% every year. Barring any

pandemics or natural disasters, it is estimated that by the year 2020, the world’s population

is expected to reach 9 billion. With these kinds of projections it is hard not to appreciate the

huge challenges associated with providing shelter for our global population, and this is

before I even considered the idea of sustainable living and regenerative design. But I guess

my thinking is a perfect example of the problem. My initial shock at the population

projections gave way to distorted thinking. Now that I have settled down, and gained a little

perspective it seems obvious that regenerative design is our only hope at providing shelter

for such volumes. I think the greatest challenges in this area are shifting awareness and

changing distorted perspectives by introducing viable, low cost sustainable housing.

Currently, regenerative design and construction are very expensive, which deters

consideration by the middle and lower economic classes.

I consider the shelter problem to be extremely challenging, especially when I

consider the rate of population growth and the fact that people will not stop breeding. For
 Lloyd 13

this reason I would apply Lyle’s principle #3, Aggregating, Not Isolating to the shelter issue.

I interpret this principle as a way of looking at complex, interwoven processes and

deconstructing these problems in order to reveal the structure of its individual parts. Lyle

also suggests that this deconstruction will enable the designer to create with a

comprehensive understanding of the initial process. I think this is important because there

are many complicated issues associated with regenerative construction methods and

materials. There are many competing factors with this field. For example the psychological

associations with living environments, legal issues with design and materials, engineering

concerns, and financial to name a few. Lyle argues that aggregation provides strong

associations, which leads to more intuitive and efficient designs that minimize consumption

and waste, essentially incorporating all the factors. My temporary conclusion is that this

principle, if applied carefully, has the potential to influence current construction standards

and practices, thereby improving regenerative design.

Based upon my research, I think Lyle’s principle #11, Shaping Form to Manifest

Process, can be applied effectively to the shelter concern. Lyle asserts that, “Regenerative

technologies are much harder to hide because they are by their nature more integral to their

context. Their operation usually requires specific attributes of form and location, and those

attributes are often highly visible.” (45) I think the idea of this principle is that instead of

cloaking the technologies in a façade that might be expensive and degenerative; they are

utilized as a means of design. Maybe aesthetic appreciation can manifest from a direct and

obvious design that celebrates the integration of technology within is respective context.

Maybe the modernists were right and form really does follow function. The reality is that

regenerative technology for shelter is in its infant stages, it is nubile if you will, and a
 Lloyd 14

consequence is a different aesthetic that will require an adjustment period before it is totally

realized and in my opinion, appreciated.

I think food has always been an issue. For as long as I can remember there have

been reports about all the starving people in Africa, and then there were the television

commercials showing starving children with flies all over their face, that were particularly

difficult to watch. I include these memories because I think they help to convey the

desperate situation that population growth and the subsequent application of the

degenerative industrial model has produced. These industrial processes are extractive by

nature, treating resources as infinite. The farmer is generally marginalized and soil, which is

the foundation for all food growth, exploited. The policy has been to produce as much as

possible, which is commonly referred to as “The Policy of Plenty.” After much research,

especially on the issues with organic farming, it is my temporary conclusion that food

production has been manipulated in an effort to increase consumption, production, and

profit. I would go as far as to label the individuals and institution that engage in these

activities, as murderers. That being said, I think the biggest challenge is how to redirect the

focus on change, especially between the political desires of the administrations in

Washington. The next challenge will be to transition from the industrial model that has

transformed agriculture into an international market, towards a regenerative model that

benefit not only the individuals at the top of the social and financial construct, but

everybody regardless of their class distinction.

Lyle’s principle # 7, Providing Multiple Pathways can be applied to the food

problem. Lyle wrote, “In most cases, regenerative technologies are relatively small in scale

and suited to specific applications under particular conditions.” (42) This concept does not
 Lloyd 15

work in a market based, industrial model. This principle supports the theory that the key to

adequate food production and even economic growth is in the small scale, family farm. I

contend that the small farming model is an example of how multiple pathways allow for

more flexible response to changing market conditions, supply and demand fluctuations, and

system degradation. Such a farming model increases crop rotation, maintains soil integrity,

and minimizes distribution, all of which are considered regenerative practices.

Lyle’s principle #3, Aggregating, Not Isolating, is equally applicable to the food

problem. Again by dismantling and analyzing the complex interwoven processes of

industrial food production, greater appreciation for the individual processes can potentially

solve the problem. In terms of farming and food production, a disaggregated farm would

have isolated crops that supported maximum production and profit. And conversely the

application of this principle would consider the interaction of these individual crops and

attempt to connect them in a regenerative way.

Having made that embarrassing admission about my negative attitude towards

regenerative process and sustainable lifestyles, I am surprised and encouraged my renewed

understanding, and appreciation for the complex, environmental issues that we are facing.

The reality is that I am part of the problem. I am being selfish and greedy. I inhabit the

industrial model. That being said, I have identified many of the problems and theoretically

applied John T. Lyle’s design principles to said problems. And accordingly, I can now say

with confidence that I have a better understanding and appreciation for the nature of these

problems, but I do not know the answers. The simple fact remains, the issue has become

about survival, and sustainable lifestyles and regenerative design are the best solutions we

have at this time.

 Lloyd 16

Works Cited

1. Gulli, Cathy. “Truth About Organic Food” MacLean’s. Toronto: Sept 17, (2007) Vol
120, Iss 35/36; pg. 82 [ProQuest] Available at
http://0-proquest.umi.com.opac.library.csupomona.edu/pqdweb?index

2. “Home Economics: Analysis of U.S. agricultural policy” by Wendell Berry

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1510/is_1986_Summer/ai_4284345

3. Cummings, Claire. “Ripe for Change: Agriculture’s Tipping Point.” WorldWatch

Institute [online article] Available at
http://www.organic-world.net/2007-graphs-maps.asp#graphs

4. "Are we willing to pay the price?; People want organics for health reasons. " The
Gazette [Montreal, Que.] 15 Oct. 2008,E.2. ProQuest Newsstand. ProQuest. Cal
Poly Pomona, Pomona, CA. 10 Nov. 2008
http://0-www.proquest.com.opac.library.csupomona.edu/

5. Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. 22 Jul. 2004. Wikimedia Foundation. 10 Aug.

2004 <http://en.wikipedia.org>.

6. Organic Farming: Producing Healthy, Safe Food By: Dr. Rafael S. Barrozo,
OPTA-Executive Director
 Lloyd 17

7. “Genetically Modified Organisms, Consumers, Food Safety and the Environment”

United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. (2001), [online article] Available
from http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/003/X9602E/x9602e01.htm#TopOfPage

8. Vasilikiotis, Christos. “Can organic Farming Feed the World?” University of

California, Berkeley [online article] Available from
http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/~christos/articles/cv_organic_farming.htm