I'm also quite interested in the "psychology of sustainability". Soon I might produce my "non-plan C" (already hinted at in an Azimuth blog [comment](http://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2010/11/11/our-future/#comment-2503)) - but except for aphorisms I'm not a good writer... well, that's why I'm exceedingly thrilled to see people like Jonathan Dickau, Curtis Faith, etc. show up here :-)

It looks one major "psychological" problem is the [tertium non datur](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertium_non_datur): Either urbanism or back-to-nature. The Arcosanti project somehow feels like falling into the same trap for me: Wanting to have both at once.

Being several billion hominids meanwhile, we can't afford turning the whole planet into one huge Arcosanti settlement. So, we need both ways of life: Highly concentrated urbanism + living at the bosom of nature. The latter in a "super-sustainable" way, compensating the non-sustainability of cities, supporting city folks with food, carbon footprint neutralization, healing, etc.

E.g. I would love to live in a compostable straw bale house or perhaps just a [tipi](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipi) with a cozy open fireplace in the middle. But, I'd also like to visit the university library (and leave my horse outside on the lawn) and have city folks producing electronic gadgets (I'll compensate them with yummy organic chicken I raise) so I can use the internet from my tipi.

Arcosanti methinks is neither of both. It is a nonsustainable psychological trap, spilling concrete and glass architecture all over mother nature's bosom.