Is technology and environmentalism compatible? Is technology neutral?

[Human No More]

biotechnology can create organisms that wipe out whole species, including humans.

So can untreated diseases.

And even now, people think about what will happen if biotech would be used to that ends (by intention or accident) and they feel helpless.

Speak for yourself.

So unless all the people undergo a worldwide "shift of consciousness" as some 2012-believers say will happen by then, I dont see that this society will undergo such a change.

I thought we were having a scientific discussion here... Why bring 2012 into it?

So a question: Do you think, this culture will undergo a voluntary transformation to a sustainable way of life and a responsible use of technology?
Please - this is not a rhethoric question - do you think such a voluntary change is likely?

Yes- if the alternative is destruction,and if the capability is there.

Humans are on a path of no return. There are 2 ways off it, ending in destruction, or a new future. The past is no longer an option, because too much has happened. Ironically, if everything DID regress, sooner or later, a new civilisation would start... Perhaps things wouldn't go as well as they did this time and humans would wipe themselves out.

Well then it is a case of economy? Would a change in economy solve the problem? Would in the ideal case the creation of a truely democratic egalitarian society enable technology to be used only in a positive way, helping people and the ecology all the way?
Or would even then there be people who misuse technology, would population still increase and suffocate the planet, would resource consumption still require damaging the natural world?

Population has to be part of the balance. I would guess you're probably opposed to space exploration (more technology) but it allows growth without overpopulation.

What is that measure - at what point do you think it starts to become unacceptabe? Where do you draw the line? What size of mining operation or how many ppm CO2 in the atmosphere or how many acres of land turned into farmland are within that measure? At what point would you say, the whole thing becomes unsustainable?

I never said a specific limit was the idea, I think you misunderstood... A balance is when no action needs to be taken and all things remain stable by themselves.