Carbon Versus Ecological Footprint
There is more than one interpretation of carbon footprint and it is often incorrectly interchanged with similar terms such as "environmental footprint" and "ecological footprint". Personal carbon calculators define a carbon footprint as the net carbon dioxide attributable to an individual over a one year period. Since there are many different greenhouse gases, the specific gas(es) must be converted to tonnes or kilograms of equivalent carbon dioxide. More information on carbon footprint can be found at Wikipedia.
The concept behind the personal carbon calculator is to allow an individual to calculate his or her own carbon footprint and then buy carbon offsets to "neutralize" their footprint. There are several websites that assist individuals in determining a carbon footprint:
U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
Very often, the term carbon footprint is confused with another term called ecological footprint. Carbon footprint only considers net greenhouse gases emitted, whereas ecological footprint is much more encompassing. The ecological footprint is a calculation of productive land and water required by an individual, both in terms of usage and also to absorb wastes that the individual produces. A carbon footprint is measured in tonnes or kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent. An ecological footprint is expressed in terms of global hectares.
An ecological footprint is broken into four consumption categories: carbon, goods and services, housing and food. The carbon category includes transportation and home energy use. An ecological footprint can also be broken down by ecosystem types or biomes. These consist of forestland, pasture land, cropland and marine fisheries. In addition to consumption categories, waste must also be considered.
![]()
Scientists have calculated the average per capita ecological footprint to be 23.47 global hectares. On a renewable basis there are only 15.71 global hectares available meaning that we are collectively overshooting the Earth's ecological capacity by almost 50%.
There are still issues with the ecological footprint calculation and
not everything is accounted for. For instance, unsustainable resource
management and pollution are ignored, resulting in an ecological
footprint that is generally underestimated. There are online ecological
footprint
calculators that are similar to the carbon footprint calculators (identified above). All of the
ecological footprint calculators make certain assumptions about
lifestyle based upon country of residence and are biased towards that
country.
For example, if you were a
reclusive monk living in California you would be assigned a large
ecological footprint even if you hardly made an impact. Also,
individuals are responsible for a portion of a city's infrastructure
and the footprint is assessed accordingly.
Needless to say the calculators are still evolving. Here are some
ecological footprint calculator websites:
There are several ways of reducing an individual’s ecological
footprint. One significant but controversial way is to shift from a
meat to a vegetarian diet. According to a recent study, it was determined that a vegetarian
diet was more environmentally friendly than a meat diet. It requires approximately 0.18 global hectares per person while a
meat diet (high fat) requires almost five times as much, or 0.85 global
hectares per person per year. There are many contributing factors for
the meat diet, including deforestation and energy required for
processing / transportation. And don't forget cow flatulence.
Scientists have estimated that the meat consumption life cycle
contributes 18% of worldwide greenhouse gas emissions. More emissions results in larger effect on the climate.
Another method of reducing one's ecological footprint is to buy
local fresh food from farmers markets and preferably organically
produced. It is important to eliminate transportation and refrigeration
costs as much as possible. Organic foods eliminate the environmental
impact of pesticides (including transportation and packaging). Farmers
markets generally incorporate less packaging materials and food is
fresh with no refrigeration or electricity requirements. More environmentally friendly all around.
When purchasing a new house there are many green initiatives that should be considered. Take advantage on the house orientation towards the sun for heating in the winter and cooling in the summer. Consider rooftop gardens and soil-less turf on outside walls as in the Olympic exhibition hall . Passive solar heating, water efficient fixtures, sustainable building materials and other green design features should be incorporated where possible.
It is estimated that households can reduce their water footprint by 60% just by adopting more conservative water usage. On the carbon front, most people can significantly increase gas mileage by changing their driving habits. And don’t forget to take mass transit whenever possible.
| |
|
|
|
![]() |
|||
Thursday, August 28, 2008 at 1:07AM |
4 Comments |
Permalink | | tagged
carbon footprint,
ecological footprint,
environmental footprint,
farmers market,
going green,
water conservation 








Reader Comments (4)
Really great article. Both informative and factual. Love the green initiatives you mention and really hope we see more of these over the coming years.
There aer many things you can implement and changes in behaviour as well as energy saving measures/purchases should not be under estimated.
Thank you for the great comment. Please note that almost all of my posts are about ways of improving one's ecological footprint.
I wanted to check out your blog, and ironicly I just got out a History of Geology class where we talked about carbon 14 conversion etc. Pretty interesting stuff.
I'm glad I clicked over to read this, Steve. I have a much better understanding of how the two are calculated now. I do detest being lumped statistically with California, and the US, in fact. My lifestyle here in the desert has significant differences from a California city dweller, and I am not (and never have been) the rabid consumer that the average American is. Still, these calculators give us a baseline, I suppose!