Page locked

This page is currently locked for editing by another user. You have to wait until this user finishes editing or the lock expires.
Currently locked by: 111.225.149.74
Lock expires at: 2024-05-16 10:10 (4 min)
This page is read only. You can view the source, but not change it. Ask your administrator if you think this is wrong.
==== ecological footprint[s] ====

"the Ecological Footprint is a resource management tool that measures how much land and water area a human population requires to produce the resources it consumes and to absorb its wastes under prevailing technology. In order to live, we consume what nature offers. Every action impacts the planet's ecosystems. This is of little concern as long as human use of resources does not exceed what the Earth can renew. But are we taking more?"

http://www.footprintnetwork.org/gfn_sub.php?content=footprint_overview

----

via: http://www.well.com/conf/inkwell.vue/topics/289/Bruce-Sterling-State-of-the-Worl-page01.html#post9


"Climate change is not gonna be combatted through voluntary acts of individual charity.  It's gonna be combatted through some kind of colossal, global-scaled, multilateral, hectic, catch-as-catch-can effort to stop burning stuff, suck the burnt smoke out of the sky, and put the smoke back into the ground.  That's not gonna get done a little green teacup  at a time, because we've been doing it for two centuries and we don't have two centuries to undo it.


"Reducing emissions" is a wrongheaded way to approach it.  If "reducing emissions" is the goal, then the best technique available is to drop dead.  The second-best technique is to go around killing a lot of people.   Nobody's got a lighter eco-footprint than a dead and buried guy.  He's not walking around leaving footprints: the Earth is piled on top of him.


We're past the point where reduction helps much; we will have to invent and deploy active means of remediation of the damage. But from another, deeper perspective:  we shouldn't involve outselves in lines of development where the ultimate victory condition is emulating dead people.  There's no appeal in that. It's bad for us.   That kind of inherent mournfulness is just not a good way to be human.  We're not footprint-generating organisms whose presence on the planet is inherently toxic and hurtful.  We need better handprints, not lighter footprints.  We need better stuff, not less stuff.  We need to think it through and take effective action, not curl up in a corner stricken with guilt and breathe shallowly."

-- BruceSterling

----


"toward a flexible visualisation device/system for energy footprints and carbon economics. extending and elucidating the often simplistic connections between energy consumption, lifestyle choices and social decision making [aka. carbon footprinting, envronmental impact, environmental footprint analysis] by collating data form a variety of sources to be able to present a more holistic understanding of the various carbon economies and their wider environmental impacts."

----

==== the cheeseburger footprint ====
"So as an exercise, let's examine the carbon footprint of something commonplace -- a cheeseburger. There's a good chance you've eaten one this week, perhaps even today. What was its greenhouse gas impact? Do you have any idea? This is the kind of question we'll be forced to ask more often as we pay greater attention to our individual greenhouse gas emissions."  http://openthefuture.com/cheeseburger_CF.html


==== offsets, calculators and questions ====
  * "Offsets Done Right" by Alex Steffen at Worldchanging > http://www.worldchanging.com/archives//007943.html
  * zerofootprint > http://0footprint.org/
  * http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/offset_calc.htm
  * http://www.carbonfootprint.com/
  * http://www.bp.com/extendedsectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9008204&contentId=7015209&BPLinkTrace=1604280000
  * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_footprint
  * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_economics
  * http://www.davosclimatealliance.org/footprint/methodology.php
  * http://www.nativeenergy.com/ calculators and offset programs

J.C.J.M. van den Bergh and H. Verbruggen (1999), Spatial sustainability, trade and indicators: an evaluation of the "ecological footprint", Ecological Economics, Vol. 29(1): 63-74.

  * http://www.co2balance.com calculators and offset programs. rail calculator only works for UK stations. estimated carbon emissions for air travel were much lower than nativeenergy (0.19 tonnes vs 0.37 for berlin-bxl return).
  * http://www.offsetters.com air travel emission calculator. even lower estimate than co2balance (0.164tonnes vs berlin-bxl return)
  * http://www.global-cool.com/

The report published by the nonprofit group Clean Air-Cool Planet (CACP) is the first independent review of retail carbon offset providers according to the CACP. > http://www.cleanair-coolplanet.org/ConsumersGuidetoCarbonOffsets.pdf

retail offset providers (from the CACP report), for discussion see > http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/005497.html
  * agcert/driving green (ie)
  * atmosfair (de)
  * carbon neutral company (uk)
  * climate care (uk)
  * co2balance (uk)
  * native energy (us)
  * sustainable travel/my climate (us)


survey of different providers with a summary of offset methods and pricing: http://www.ecobusinesslinks.com/carbon_offset_wind_credits_carbon_reduction.htm

guilt and redemption, from http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2006/10/19/selling-indulgences/
  * "Just as in the 15th and 16th centuries you could sleep with your sister and kill and lie without fear of eternal damnation, today you can live exactly as you please as long as you give your ducats to one of the companies selling indulgences. It is pernicious and destructive nonsense." -- George Monbiot

"Am I saving the planet, or am I a sucker?" Are Offsets a scam? http://icanhashappy.blogspot.com/2007/09/on-carbon-neutrality.html

Avoiding Mass Extinction (Events) with AMEE > http://www.amee.cc/

----

"To understand the subtleties and difficulties in ecological footprinting, think of accounting.[...] How hard can accounting really be? How can any grey areas exist in an activity as seemingly concrete and dry as counting beans? But grey areas abound, and the task of accounting for nature's resources as well as their depletion from human demand is, to use the colloquial, a doozy. How can one compare the value of a single fish to that of a bushel of corn or a California redwood? How does that relationship change from the exhaust pouring out of your car or the dishwater circling your drain?" http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/006904.html


==== . ..various footprints ====
   * 6.8 grams of CO<sub>2</sub> equiv. per google search >> http://blogs.sun.com/rolfk/entry/your_co2_footprint_when_using

---

[[Category Luminous Green]]

---