April 8th, 2013
When I initially completed the quiz I fared at 4.7 earths if
everyone lived like me. So I went back and completed the more in-depth
questions thinking I’d score better, not to my surprise did I see I scored
worse by .1!
Upon exploring the options to further reduce my carbon
footprint it asked me to eat less animal products – meat, fish, poultry, dairy,
etc. Then it requested I purchase more post-consumer material and packaging.
Which nowadays is the norm, but I don’t go out of my way to purchase it. But if
I happen to need/want it and it is recycled packaging, we both win. The last
thing it suggested I do was to take a trip locally instead of flying (I fly
once a year, if that! Sheesh).
These requests are untenable in my eye – asking me sacrifice
my dietary needs for the planet is abhorrent. Not to mention having me drive
instead of fly when if I’m lucky make one trip up to Virginia a year.
The least obtrusive request is to buy more recycled products
and materials. As I mentioned before, many items sold now have some sort of
recycle initiative and if I happen to purchase one or a few in a trip to the
store than I am contributing to reduce my footprint.
In all honesty, I’m not sure how much the earth would be
able to sustain if everyone lived like I do. Perhaps not very many since I
seemed to just surpass the 4.5 – 4.6 planet earth average range. I looked again
on my results page and didn't see it listed anywhere.
What would be more interesting to me is to see how the
algorithms are compiled and the basic guidelines are chosen. To someone who
finds this to be a bunch of bologna anyway, I wonder how scientific the science
is behind it to begin with.
No comments:
Post a Comment