ecological footprint test, and resulting discussion....

http://www.earthday.net/footprint/index.asp

i'm sure some of you have taken this test. for those who haven't, it calculates your 'ecological footprint', meaning the amount of land it takes to accomodate your lifestyle, and the number of planet earths required to sustain humanity if everyone lived similar to you.

it is an widely accepted survey based on actual national numbers, scientific research, and whenever in doubt errs on the side of conservative estimates, meaning the results are likely even higher than it may say.

its short.


please take it, post your results, and perhaps we can get an interesting converstation going concerning its implications...

CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES

FOOD 1.2

MOBILITY 0.4

SHELTER 0.7

GOODS/SERVICES 0.8

TOTAL FOOTPRINT 3.1



IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 8.8 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.

WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.




IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.7 PLANETS.


:oops: so much for my being 'environmentally conscious', heh.

FOOD - 3.3
MOBILITY - 0.1
SHELTER - 0.9
GOODS/SERVICES - 1

TOTAL FOOTPRINT - 5.3

If everyone lived like me, we'd need 2.9 planets.

CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES
FOOD 1.5
MOBILITY 0.1
SHELTER 0.8
GOODS/SERVICES 1.2
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 3.6



IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 4.8 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.

WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.



IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 2 PLANETS.




Cool test. But hey, it's fucking impossible .

When living in the United States:
CATEGORY ACRES
FOOD 4.7
MOBILITY 4.4
SHELTER 5.9
GOODS/SERVICES 9.4
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 24



IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.

WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.



IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 5.5 PLANETS.

Living in Sweden (so far):

CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES
FOOD 1.6
MOBILITY 0.2
SHELTER 0.9
GOODS/SERVICES 1
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 3.7



IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 6.7 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.

WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.



IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 2.1 PLANETS.

------
I guess that's a bit of an improvement...Although ideally I wouldn't be living in a city at all, nor would I be buying food from a supermarket. Maybe one day.

CATEGORY ACRES
FOOD 6.9
MOBILITY 28.9
SHELTER 30.4
GOODS/SERVICES 67.2
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 133



IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.

WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.



IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 30 PLANETS.

CATEGORY ACRES

FOOD 6.9

MOBILITY 11.9

SHELTER 9.4

GOODS/SERVICES 19.3

TOTAL FOOTPRINT 48


IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.

WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.


IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 10.7 PLANETS.

wow...we're all screwed.

CATEGORY ACRES

FOOD 5.9

MOBILITY 0.5

SHELTER 1.7

GOODS/SERVICES 1.5

TOTAL FOOTPRINT 10



IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.

WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.


IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 2.2 PLANETS.




Survival of the fittest, I think we oughtta start killing people...

EVERYONE FOLLOW ME! OH AND BRING GUNS (KIDDING!)

CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES

FOOD 1.9

MOBILITY 0.2

SHELTER 1.4

GOODS/SERVICES 1.5

TOTAL FOOTPRINT 5


IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 5.3 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.

WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.



IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 2.8 PLANETS.


Not too bad if I do say so myself :mrgreen:

FOOD 2.6
MOBILITY 0.1
SHELTER 0.3
GOODS/SERVICES 0.3
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 3.3

N COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 7.6 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.

WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.



IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.8 PLANETS.

That's ok I guess... being on a farm means most of the food I eat is grown ourselves, which would make a difference.

One thing to note in this thread is that some of the results are in hectares and some are in acres, I guess the website automatically considered that for all the different countries. I think the conversion is 1 hectare to every 2.5 acres, but that's off the top of my head so I'm not sure.

An interesting little quiz, although I was expecting a lot more questions.

CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES

FOOD 1.4

MOBILITY 1.4

SHELTER 0.6

GOODS/SERVICES 3.2

TOTAL FOOTPRINT 6.6



IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 1.5 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.




WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.



IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 3.7 PLANETS.



Considering I drive less than 50km a week and work in the same building as I live thats pretty surprising.... I guess I am in small Japan which imports all its food...

CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES
FOOD 0.4
MOBILITY 0.1
SHELTER 0.3
GOODS/SERVICES 0.4
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 1.2



IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 1.1 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.

WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.

IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.0 PLANETS.

I think its because I live in a village and my college is near to it. I should cross only a river in wooden boat to reach the city. Then I go to college by bus or in my friend's car. And I personally dont have any motor vehicle.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by korothism

IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.0 PLANETS.
e.

---

Fucking hippy! :D

Nah, nice job. India-people arn't living like McAmericans.

But still... If even you need an entire planet.... don't we need 2 planets At the moment? Becouse of the starving african people? Or becouse of the chinese that live packed up in flats?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Neruo
But still... If even you need an entire planet.... don't we need 2 planets At the moment? Becouse of the starving african people? Or becouse of the chinese that live packed up in flats?

---

I think that there are enough resources to happily provide stuff to 9 billion people or something like that. I dob't know the exact figure. I guess we're not spreading it out evenly.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Neruo


Fucking hippy! :D

Nah, nice job. *India-people arn't living like McAmericans. *

But still... If even you need an entire planet.... don't we need 2 planets At the moment? Becouse of the starving african people? Or becouse of the chinese that live packed up in flats?

---

if everyone in the first world lived a sustainable lifestyle, only one earth would be needed, and the third world would have enough as well.

it is mostly because the first world arrogantly takes more than they are entitled to that the third world exists..there is enough pie for everyone to have one piece and be healthy, but we take 2 or 3 or 100 pieces. obviously someone has to go without. it really is that simple.

presently the first world uses land that could grow enough food to feed every starving person easily, and uses it to grow food which it feeds to cattle. all so we can eat meat every day like a bunch of gluttons and die early from heart disease...

presently there is enough fertile land to feed everyone. it is the distribution that is fucked up.

Cattle eat between one third and half of all crops grown in the world. They get their protein from plants. And then we absorb it (along with accumulated pesticides) for our protein.

The world's cattle - excluding pigs and chickens - consume quantity of food the equivalent to the caloric needs of 8.7 billion people.

This is a very inefficient way to produce food. i am not saying everyone should go veg*an. there is no need to. we could all eat meat two or three times a week and be healthier, live longer, and ensure we are not taking more than our share.


and this logic extends to the other areas covered in the quiz. most third worlders contribute almost nothing to transportation impact upon the environment. shanty towns or mud huts hardly use electricity or running water, etc...

McDonalds Is klling everyone. It's really true that if no-one ate meat there would be enough land to grow crops to feed everyone...

but damn, I love the meat :) So I guess we have to teach cows to eat plastic or something. :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Neruo
McDonalds Is klling everyone. It's really true that if no-one ate meat there would be enough land to grow crops to feed everyone...

but damn, I love the meat :) So I guess we have to teach cows to eat plastic or something. :D

---

Yes, I love meat too much to ever give it up. Not like I sit down to a fat, juicy steak every night, but I do enjoy a big slice of cow every now and again.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by burns91


Yes, I love meat too much to ever give it up. Not like I sit down to a fat, juicy steak every night, but I do enjoy a big slice of cow every now and again.

---

You should try my bologna pony...it's to die for. ;)~

Quote:

---

Originally posted by InTheMoment

You should try my bologna pony...it's to die for. ;)~

---

Ponys are for glue. Real man eat Cow :)

Hmmmm now I am hungry. =)

WOW. I preach to my friends to be more conservative.
CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES
FOOD 0.7
MOBILITY 0.3
SHELTER 0.4
GOODS/SERVICES 0.8
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 2.2
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 2.5 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.

WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.

CATEGORY ACRES
FOOD 5.9
MOBILITY 1.5
SHELTER 4.2
GOODS/SERVICES 4

TOTAL FOOTPRINT 16



IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.

WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.

IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 3.5 PLANETS.


Wow. And I thought I was fairly easy on the planet. I know I drive too much -- but I don't have a lot of choice in that.

OTOH, I'm way below the average American, so I guess that's a good thing. :P

Don't feel too bad TygrHawk - I was fairly horrified that that was my score too. I've always considered myself ecologically conscious and a supporter of sustainable living practices, but out here in the Midwest - land of the automobile behemoths and nothing else where streetcar tracks were bought and ripped out of the ground in the 1920's by the likes of GM and Ford to ensure that everyone has to have a car - eating very little meat and buying organic produce just doesn't make up for the fact that I have no other form of transport besides my car, and walking is only good in the neighborhood since motorists around here consider the sidewalk a convenient right-hand passing lane. :roll: You do what you can, though - carpool, recycle, combine car trips, purchase local products, etc. That helps, even if it doesn't offset the effects of the mainstream American ethos of "consumption unto destruction." We've gotta try, though.

CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES

FOOD 1.1

MOBILITY 0.7

SHELTER 0.5

GOODS/SERVICES 0.9

TOTAL FOOTPRINT 3.2



IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 8.8 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.

WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.




IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.8 PLANETS.

Not bad I guess. I emailed that link to everyone on my contact list.

How come i need 6.4 planets?
I mean, i don't even know how big my house is in square meters, so i picked the first one...:P
It's not really that big...