My Footprint Results
Now, if we look at the breakdown of the bar graph, we can see that my carbon consumption is significantly lower than Australia’s average almost 30 global hectares. Actually, my household’s carbon consumption (4.3) is less than the global average of almost 7 global hectares.
Now, I could be happy about that and think “wow, how good am I. Clearly, I am a great global citizen, and I can hold my head high because I offset my household emissions and use green power and sometimes I walk to the supermarket.”
Or, I can view it in terms of total consumption.
Global averages for Food, Housing and Goods & Services are, respectively, about 7, 2 and 6.8 global hectares.
My own averages, while consistently below my country’s averages, are 22, 6 and 6.5.
So, what does that tell us?
It means that food-wise and housing-wise, I use triple the global average, which is still 150% of what the earth can sustain.
It also means that in terms of goods & services, I use less than average, but that is still more than what the earth can sustain.
So, where does this rambling train of thought take us?
It doesn’t matter how much carbon I reduce, there is other consumption that more than offsets any reductions that I make. If I continue as I am, then I am destined to reduce the amount of stuff available to others, and to reduce the quality of that stuff since pressure on limited resources can invariably reduce their capacity to regenerate.
In short, and in waffle, I think the answer to my friend’s question is that “going carbon neutral” is a beneficial thing, but it is not the only thing. In terms of middle class luxury, I think the answer is that one of the adjuncts to this luxury is the luxury of taking a blinkered approach to things, by isolating individual components and focusing on them to compensate for our unwillingness to focus on our real impact on natural systems that affect others.
And that is why this post comes under the categories of Tread Lightly and Reject Greed.
Post script: I am aware that I am typing this on an electricity hungry, highly polluting personal computer instead of doing good work to save the world from the tyranny of my own hyprocrisy.
2 responses so far ↓
1 Chris // Dec 27, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Thanks for the waffle Bryan.
Another question.
Are the efforts of those who endeavour to carefully consider their impact on this world a reflection of our individualistic approach to most things in this life? By creating individual approaches to conservation are we merely perpetuating the breakdown of community?
Or are we better off trying to more efficiently utilise together the systems that we have developed as a society? Or are the shining examples we are given in a myriad of blogs and alternate approaches ways to inspire us to action and what starts with one can grow to many?
These are only questions.
2 admin // Dec 27, 2009 at 8:56 pm
Individualism is a given. After all, freedom of choice and pluralism are an integral component of our post-modern affluence, whether we like it, agree with it, or not.
But, from within such individualistic approaches can emerge new communities. For example, the 90% Reduction community continues almost 2 years after it began, and continues to allow people from otherwise disparate geographies and cultures to come together to explore common concerns; concerns that are often mocked or derided as “individualistic” within their conventional communities.
I believe that a middle road is required. Individualism, when shared among individuals, creates communities who can efficiently utilise existing societal systems.
The Crop Circle is a localised example of this; a mixed bag of people who individually are quite different and unique. We all share one thing, and that is enough. We grow stuff. By coming together, many others have also begun to grow stuff, and those who are perhaps more intermittent in their growing of stuff become more consistent. Ultimately, it was individualism that gave rise to this.
As to whether any example can be shining depends upon the individual eye that is beholding it.
What do you think?
Leave a Comment