How big is your ecological footprint ?........ - Page 3

kiwi · #51 (**permalink**) 28-10-2007, 04:32 PM

1.1 for me

Paul mabbott · #52 (**permalink**) 28-10-2007, 07:28 PM

I think that the biggest problem with all of these calculators is that some people can cheat honestly!

I can certainly put down no car usage - it's nonsense because my wife has a car (and I travel in it sometimes, as do the sons) so the car energy usage should really be spread over four people (although not equally). More so house heating, cooking energy &c - these need dividing up ...

Still, as you say, if it makes people think, can't be bad .....

Quote:

Originally Posted by svenrufus

These are a nice idea to make people think about what they are doing, but they are a bit rubbish really if there is that much discrepancy. It's all just too crude a guesstimate.

Either way, it's quite sobering to think that living as frugally as I do, I have more than my fair share of global resources.

Brains · #53 (**permalink**) 29-10-2007, 11:50 AM

1.6 for me - which is about the same as one I tried a couple of year's ago, which came out at 1.4

I know my wife came out at 1.0 on that one, so overall, we're not doing too badly

Coley · #54 (**permalink**) 17-11-2007, 10:27 AM

Wow

I need 1 planet.

I'm not too surprised as I really do try to do everything with my consience switched on.

1.93 planets on the WWF carbon calculator

not to bad but I only bought 1 mp3 player in the last 12 months.

The Black Rabbit · #55 (**permalink**) 17-11-2007, 11:38 AM

My Footprint is a Size 14, but as for my ecological footprint....

Oh dear. 1.6 for me too. (I thought I was sooo good n all).
Mainly due to a lot of meat being eaten in our house.
Doug

peppermint · #56 (**permalink**) 26-12-2007, 08:17 PM

ok i got 1.0 planets but this is definatly not accurate for me.

Firstly i live in a caravan so there is no option for this, (cant afford to get on the housing ladder and really do not want to keep giving landlords £600+ a month rent on a flat when i could be saving up for a house of my own)

Then there is nothing about composting and other types of waste, nothing about what appliances you have in your home eg washing machine, dishwasher, of which i dont have any anyway. Nothing about how much water you use - when living in a caravan you really notice how much water you use or dont use as the case may be (as you have to keep filling up big aqua rolls from the tap in the field and connecting it to your van).
Nothing about what type of electricity provider you are with i.e green or not, plus many more things i could probably mention. It is a very vague calculator, but like someone said earlier - possibly Paul Mabbot if i remember right, if it makes people stop and think, then it is doing something good.

As was also mentioned by someone earlier, a guy on a radio program talked about the 4x4 vehicle he owned and justified having it by owning a caravan. I would like to say that i don't buy that arguement at all. We have a 17 foot caravan, quite old and heavy which we pull fine with a 1.8l diesel mondeo.
Never had a problem with it and have towed the caravan loads on a regular basis.

NickCantle · #57 (**permalink**) 27-12-2007, 02:42 AM

1.3 for me in this tedious test

oneworld · #58 (**permalink**) 25-02-2008, 10:14 PM

I got 2.2 planets required..............I was as honest as possible but was still surprised compared with others with the 1.0-1.6 planets as I thought we are pretty frugal.

But if everybody was like me then our population would be zero by next generation

I was a bit surprised that the motorcycle isn't more efficient - no waiting in tail backs with the engine running or driving around looking for car parking spaces. I guess at least I'm having fun when I burn up the hydrocarbons but that's not really the point is it.

We only flush when necessary and put jumpers on rather than crank the heating up.

Never the less we are all part of the problem

Jas

Wildwood · #59 (**permalink**) 26-02-2008, 09:48 AM

I planet for me. I'm pleased and quite surprised as although I do my best to be environmentally friendly I always feel there's still a lot of room for improvement. I don't drive (my husband does but I'm only a passenger in the car a couple of times a week on average), I live in a small house, only eat animal products occassionally and keep processed foods to a minimum, so it would seem I'm not doing too badly on the whole.

There are things I do to help the environment that weren't mentioned in the quiz like composting, using energy efficient lightbulbs and environmentally friendly household products like Ecover, recycling, using canvas bags and mainly buying secondhand clothes and I buy organic foods as much as possible. I try to buy locally produced goods whenever possible but that proves to be difficult most of the time, I'll have to start visiting farmers markets and farm shops to improve on that one. I'm on the lookout for a local organic veg box scheme. Everything I've seen is miles away which sort of defeats the object.

tufftie · #60 (**permalink**) 02-03-2008, 09:36 AM

Well I've not done the quiz since everything is changing with me at the moment - and for the better in all ways including environmentally!

Up until now i've aware about the impact lifestyle has on the environment and have done what I can - within tight boundaries - i.e. recycling where possible, having organic veg when I can afford to, composting, not having a car etc. However things are now about to change...

For a while I'll be wwoofing (working on organic farms in exchange for food and keep) and learning about eco building and self sufficiency etc. My one mar on the footprint will be the necessary use of a car.

Then If my dreams come true i'm going to buy a small wood (with sea at bottom - dream on !) and build a wooden yurt type house. I aim to be as self sufficient as I can. Environmentally - compost loos, grey water systems, organic food, energy not decided yet and a well for water. No car but will have to make a trailer for a bike. It sounds like a dream but it's environmentally sound and I'n going for it !

epops · #61 (**permalink**) 02-03-2008, 09:47 AM

i need 2.8 planets

wonder if i can chose the other 1.8?

coasty · #62 (**permalink**) 04-03-2008, 03:56 PM

Just went to the site and its broken down, I think it knows how bad my footprint will be and has freaked out

It has now drawn breath and is working however I am ashamed to admit that my score is 6.4 planets. Am I still welcome on the forum....

Interestingly I just did the WWF survey and that says 2.84 planets, On both I was totally honest with the answers .

Rich_ · #63 (**permalink**) 05-03-2008, 05:11 PM

I wouldn't worry about it too much. You can only do so much without becoming an Amish

eeyore · #64 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich_

I wouldn't worry about it too much. You can only do so much without becoming an Amish

true - and the wording on the site is "if everybody lived like you we would need ..." as i noted much higher up a vast proportion of the worlds population is in the developing world and has no chance of "living like you" so while sites like this are good for awareness raising the calculations are essentially worthless.

coasty · #65 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eeyore

true - and the wording on the site is "if everybody lived like you we would need ..." as i noted much higher up a vast proportion of the worlds population is in the developing world and has no chance of "living like you" so while sites like this are good for awareness raising the calculations are essentially worthless.

I think what blows the score for me is having two 6ft teenage sons who eat meat every day and the average 750 miles a week I drive

Adam Cheeseman · #66 (**permalink**) 07-03-2008, 07:37 PM

Mine was 2 planets, but I think it was quite rigid and didn't help that it was in american. So who knows, by their standards I probably use half a dozen planets worth.

Cheers,

Adam

excoriate · #67 (**permalink**) 24-03-2008, 11:34 AM

I need 3.1 planets. The shame

I blame the meat eating and the driving (a tiny diesel!)

excoriate · #68 (**permalink**) 24-03-2008, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by excoriate

I need 3.1 planets. The shame

I blame the meat eating and the driving (a tiny diesel!)

*EDIT* After having it pointed out to me, I need 3.1 hectares, and I need 1.7 planets. Can I still blame driving for not reading properly?

eeyore · #69 (**permalink**) 24-03-2008, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by excoriate

Can I still blame driving for not reading properly?

only if you were doing both at once

Happibun · #70 (**permalink**) 24-03-2008, 10:54 PM

Meh... 2.4 hectares which equals 1.3 Planets. Compared to the 'average' of 5.3 hectares, we have less than half the 'average' footprint per person in this area.

I'm a divorced mum on Income Support, so I can't be anything but frugal. We could be greener, but have to rely on what we can afford, and that actually puts our carbon footprint up a bit.

the lily · #71 (**permalink**) 26-03-2008, 10:10 AM

1.0 planets for me.The questions could do with some tweaking though as some weeks i do need to accept a lift in a car to attend school functions(4 miles away),there are no options for 'occasional use'.Interesting though.

MarkE70 · #72 (**permalink**) 27-03-2008, 07:23 PM

1.8 planets for me (i actually thought it might be more!). I am a bit sceptical about the survey, although its probably as accurate as you can get when addressing the entire population.
No matter what you scored I reckon we could all do a bit more to lower our ecological footprint.