With housing starts in a slump, developable land getting scarce, and the whole country holding their breath to see just how high energy prices will rise, the deck is already stacked against new construction. Adding a philosophical buzz kill won't break the camels back, but it won't help either.

Here's the argument.

If we believe that climate instability is a result of our greenhouse gas emissions, and we also recognize that consumerism is mostly to blame for our expanding carbon footprint, then conservation must be a priority. Conservation is an easy concept to sell (and swallow) if it means swapping out light bulbs or turning down the thermostat. Let's face it, the most effective selling point of going green is that it can save you money.

But conservation also means making due with what you have, or sometimes, doing without.

To get the full benefits of a conservation-minded society we have to examine and understand the difference between wants and needs. We may want to build a new home, but do we need to build a new home. Can we retrofit our current home to suit our needs? Can we step into an existing home that would satisfy our requirements? Are we seeking emotional gains (like the desire for "new") by building a new house over more practical gains like needing more space for a growing family (which could be met with buying an existing home)?

If we are honest with ourselves, these are easy questions to answer, but tough to live with.

It comes down to the tried and true mantra, "reduce, reuse, and recycle".

The end of new construction isn't a very popular notion for home builders, home buyers, and developers, but history shows us that time and again when resources get tight consumer's choices have to change. For instance, I'd love to homestead in Colorado, but that opportunity in our nation's history came and went. Living without a speed limit (as we did until recently here in Montana) was a thrill, but in the end it proved to be impractical, wasteful and flat out dangerous.

Personally I believe we can strike a balance between new home construction and conservation, but considering how much farm land is eaten up each year by new home developments, the inflated size of most new homes, and the general lack of energy saving technologies put into them, I tend to think that the pendulum is still swinging on the non-sustainable side.