Politics.be - Hoe vuil ben jij?

Politics.be (https://forum.politics.be/index.php)

- Over koetjes en kalfjes... (https://forum.politics.be/forumdisplay.php?f=9)

- - Hoe vuil ben jij? (https://forum.politics.be/showthread.php?t=21544)

Hoe vuil ben jij?

Hoe vuil ben jij, test het hier!

Mijn resultaat:

Citaat:

CATEGORY................................GLOBAL HECTARES

FOOD.......................................1.7

MOBILITY..................................1.6

SHELTER...................................1

GOODS/SERVICES.......................2.8

TOTAL FOOTPRINT.....................7.1

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 3.9 PLANETS.

Category Global Hectares
Food 1.7
Mobility 0.5
Shelter 1
Goods/services 2
Total Footprint 5.2

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 2.9 Planets.

Category Global Hectares
Food 1.5
Mobility 0.3
Shelter 0.8
Goods/services 0.9
Total Footprint 3.5

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 1.9 Planets.

Citaat:

category Global Hectares

Food 1.7

Mobility 0.4

Shelter 0.6

Goods/services 1.1

Total Footprint 3.8

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.

ik heb geen auto, dus dat maakt een groot verschil denk ik.

Ik geraak aan 117 hectaren in de winter en heb 26.4 planeten nodig. Het is tijd dat de anderen wat minder gaan verbruiken zodat ik mijn levensstijl kan voortzetten.

Ik heb wel een auto oriana... :)

Goeie propaganda die ecologische voetafdruk, maar wetenschappelijk is er (uiteraard) vanalles mis mee. Uit luiheid beperk ik mijn inhoudelijke kritiek hier wel tot een copy-paste uit the economist:

Citaat:

The footprint idea combines the area required for cropland, grazing land, forest products, fishing grounds, sustainable use of energy, and built-up land (making adjustments for the productivity of different sorts of space). In 1999, according to WWF, the total came to 13.7 billion hectares. But the group says that only about a quarter of the planet's surface, 11.4 billion hectares, is available to supply these services—hence the overdraft.

[...]

Exclude energy from the total footprint, and it is harder to get alarmed. Growth in the ecological footprint excluding energy was much smaller than growth in global population between 1960 and 2000: that is, the ecological footprint per person, excluding energy, has been shrinking rapidly. Hardly a sign of reckless unsustainability.

So a lot turns on whether it is right to include the energy footprint in the aggregate measure—and on whether it is right to estimate this as the forest area required to absorb CO2. On the first question, it is not obvious why sustainable development should require no change whatever in CO2 concentrations, as the energy footprint implicitly demands. And even if sustainability did require this, there would be other ways of doing it—such as by increasing the use of renewable sources. Some renewable sources (such as windmills in deserts) make no demands on biologically productive space, which incidentally implies that the limit of 11.4 billion hectares for the area available to provide environmental services is wrong.

Enfin, eigenlijk is er nog wel wat meer mis met het world 3-model (hetzelfde dat de club van Rome gebruikte trouwens ;)), maar dat hoort niet bij K&K. Wel nog even toevoegen dat het antwoord op bovenstaande kritiek altijd bestaat uit één of andere vorm van: "Ja, maar wij zeggen toch niet dat ons model klopt? Ondertussen blijven we het wel verder gebruiken."

(Sorry jongens, dat moest er even uit - ik hou niet zo van platte propaganda.)

Om toch even aan het spelletje mee te doen: ik heb zo'n 10 maal minder planeten nodig dan onze Yankee. ;-)

Citaat:

CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES

FOOD 1.3

MOBILITY 0.5

SHELTER 0.7

GOODS/SERVICES 1

TOTAL FOOTPRINT 3.5

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 1.9 PLANETS.

Niet slecht, al zeg ik het zelf.

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door ossaert

Niet slecht, al zeg ik het zelf.

... maar kan beter! ;mrgreen:
minder beesten eten en meer fietsen!

CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES
FOOD 1
MOBILITY 0.1
SHELTER 0.6
GOODS/SERVICES 0.6
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 2.3

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 1.3 PLANETS.

:cheer: doggy :cheer: doggy :cheer:

CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES
FOOD 1.4
MOBILITY 0
SHELTER 1.4
GOODS/SERVICES 1.5
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 4.3

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 2.4 PLANETS.

dat komt gewoon door dat vlees. voor de rest doe ik niks verkeerd, behalve in de stad gent wonen..

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Astenblieft mensen

dat komt gewoon door dat vlees. voor de rest doe ik niks verkeerd, behalve in de stad gent wonen..

niks verkeerd?!

MOORDENAAR!

foei doggy! foei!
;-)

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door doggy

niks verkeerd?!

MOORDENAAR!

foei doggy! foei!
;-)

hehehe. maar het is zo lekkerrrrrrrrr....

Mijn resultaat:

CATEGORYGLOBAL HECTARES

FOOD1.2

MOBILITY0.2

SHELTER0.9

GOODS/SERVICES1.2

TOTAL FOOTPRINT3.5

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 1.9 PLANETS.

Citaat:

Category Global Hectares
Food 1.1
Mobility 0.2
Shelter 2.3
Goods/services 2
Total Footprint 5.6

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 3.1 Planets.

Niet slecht vergeleken met de rest van ons landje maar blijkbaar nog niet goed genoeg :?

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Griffin

Ik heb wel een auto oriana... :)

Proficiat! goed om weten :lol:
maar euh... waarom vertel je mij dat?
;-)

CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES
FOOD 1.7
MOBILITY 1.9
SHELTER 1.1
GOODS/SERVICES 3.2
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 7.9

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 4.4 PLANETS.

8O

:oops:

CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES

FOOD 1

MOBILITY 0.5

SHELTER 1.1

GOODS/SERVICES 1.3

TOTAL FOOTPRINT 3.9

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 2.2 PLANETS.

CATEGORYGLOBAL HECTARES

FOOD1.5

MOBILITY0.1

SHELTER0.7

GOODS/SERVICES0.6

TOTAL FOOTPRINT2.9

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 1.6 PLANETS.

Ik doe mijn best, maar nog niet goed genoeg.

volgens mij liegt iedereen die minder planeet nodig heeft als ikke.

;-)

Ik heb twee planeten nodig : eentje voor mij en die andere voor de rest.