Thus spake Winston Churchill in a different but parallel situation.
Proposed:The Office of Sustainable Urbanism
The mission is simple: ensure that all City policy promotes sustainable urbanism. And no apologies about the use of the word "urbanism." Seattle is a city, and it's going to become more urban over time, and that is a good thing. And for that matter, no apologies about the use of the word "sustainable" either. We all know what it means, and we all know it is imperative. (italics added)"And for that matter, no apologies about the use of the word ’sustainable’ either. We all know what it means..." "We all know what it means." Surely you jest.
Such a sentiment is pure hubris. No way do we all, or anyone, know what it means. You have just elucidated the very reason why I would be very much against the proposal: arrogance, pride, know-it-allism.
Green roofs for example (and the visual highlight of the post referenced above.) Do they make any sense? From a cost-effectiveness basis? When? Where? How? No one yet knows for sure. (And if someone tells that they do know, they are either a knave or a fool.) Green roofs are a noble experiment — but they are an experiment. So in the most loving and respectful way, let me call bullshit that we all know what sustainability means in the real world of gravity and weathering and finite resources.