Ecological Footprint Analysis: Calculations, Explanations,

ecological footprint analysis: Calculations, explanations, and remedies.

The ecological footprint is a calculation of how much a particular individual's lifestyle exerts a toll upon the planet. It calculates how many nonrenewable resources the individual uses, how an individual's food and energy consumption impacts the planet, and puts the unnaturalness of modern life into context by stating how many 'earths' an individual requires to sustain his or her lifestyle -- in other words, it shows if everyone lived like the individual with a particular kind of footprint on the earth, how many earths this would require. Ecological footprint analysis can also be used to analyze a household, a nation, or an industry.

On a basic level, simply the process of doing an ecological footprint analysis can be a positive wake-up call for the individual. In some ways, doing this analysis did not 'feel' very fair -- there is only so much one can avoid traveling by car, for example, depending on where you live. Some individuals may have access to more local produce and food. Other individuals may have low utility and energy bills and little trash because they spend most of their day away from home, but still tax the planet because of their use of energy and disposal of waste at work, school, or leisure-time activities. But the unsustainable nature of modern life and the need for many 'earths' is an important concept to grasp, given that more and more members of the developing world are driving, eating and consuming like members of the developed world.

Some critical aspects of environmental usage were left out that we considered important. For example, water waste was not calculated, nor was the use of potentially hazardous toxins -- whether we used organic foods or foods grown with pesticides. Whether we recycle or not was not calculated. Also, the fact that we did not have children should have lessened our ecological footprint. The more children a couple has ensures couple is generating more potential consumers for the future. The tool really should have been called calculate a rough estimate of your ecological footprint rather than all of it.

I was surprised by the divergence in our results, given that we are all within the same age range and have similar lifestyles. My footprint was mainly enlarged by what I ate, as was Zulemia's while Kelsey's was dominated by goods and services. However, we all roughly required the same number of planets to sustain our current lifestyles. The differences had to do with how much we rode in cars, used public transportation, and drove our cars. Kelsey did not drive her car as much as Zulemia or me. However, she tended to purchase more goods and services that generated trash and waste. I am not much of a 'shopper' but I eat more environmentally damaging foodstuffs, and eat more food grown far away from local sources that generates trash than either Kelsey or Zuleima. This is partially due to my lifestyle, gender, and greater caloric needs.

Given the impact food choices had on my ecological footprint, I decided to do more research into reducing the impact of this aspect of my lifestyle choices. I found that "if Americans were to reduce meat consumption by just 20% it would be as if we all switched from a standard sedan -- a Camry, say -- to the ultra-efficient Prius. Similarly, a study last year by the National Institute of Livestock and Grassland Science in Japan estimated that 2.2 pounds of beef is responsible for the equivalent amount of carbon dioxide emitted by the average European car every 155 miles, and burns enough energy to light a 100-watt bulb for nearly 20 days" (Bittman 2008).

Meat-based agriculture contributes to nearly three-quarters of all water-quality problems in the nation's rivers and streams, and is a far more ecologically draining way to produce food and feed the planet than through vegetarian sources (Bittman 2008). Simply going vegan for a few meals a week would substantially lessen my and most American's carbon footprint, without having to forgo animal products altogether. Given that more and more Americans are consuming animal products, and more individuals in the developing world are also consuming animal products, reducing this area of consumption is vitally important for the sustainability of the planet. It surprised me to learn that reducing meat consumption was such an important part of reducing one's ecological footprint, perhaps even more important than reducing one's consumption of fossil fuels through transportation. Buying a Prius has received substantially more praise in the media than reducing meat consumption.

But reducing meat consumption is not enough. Factory dairy production is also very taxing on the environment. Raising chickens for eggs and cows for milk production takes a great deal of the earth's resources. In the developing world, consumption of dairy has become a new part of the modern lifestyle. Finding new sources of calcium through non-dairy sources will be a critical part of sustainability in the future. Selecting eggs and milk from local rather than factory-farmed sources, as well as foregoing dairy products for some meals altogether is another important step in reducing one's ecological footprint. Although not quite as large a component of the ecological footprint, reducing consumption of imported fruits and vegetables and buying at farmer's markets can further reduce the food component of the ecological footprint.

Reducing the amount of trash we create is also important. The most obvious immediate way to reduce the amount of trash is to recycle. However, the ecological footprint program did not ask questions about trash. Instead, it asked simply how much trash the individual created. This may initially seem unfair, but upon reflection I believe there is a 'method' behind its madness, namely that an individual can recycle, but still generate a great deal of waste through overconsumption of resources. Goods were a major source of waste for all of us. Simply consuming less, not buying as much and reusing what we have, will save money as well as save the environment.