make a smaller ecological footprint

http://www.thecarbonaccount.com/

http://www.ecologicalfootprint.com/

This one does carbon footprint and ecological footprint while taking into account efficiency. Try it.

http://www.vegansociety.com/html/environment/

http://www.vegansociety.com/html/environment/land/

http://www.vegansociety.com/html/environment/water/

http://www.vegansociety.com/html/environment/energy/

http://www.vegansociety.com/html/environment/energy/global_warming.php

As some of you already know, I changed from being a vegetarian to vegan. The following article by Richard Hawting of the Dundee People and Planet shows why:

Are your meals costing the earth?

As our awareness of climate change grows, so to does the realisation of the impact of every one of our day to day actions. We are frequently reminded to save energy through all sorts of small actions. By reducing our carbon footprint through these small actions, we can all play our part in preventing the apocalyptic scenario that some predict.

Yet one lifestyle choice is not as often mentioned when discussing how we can play a part in averting run away climate change. This lifestyle choice relates to food. The stuff that sustains us every day, the topic of many conversations, TV programmes and social activities could in fact be one of the most damaging effects that we as individuals have on the environment. Buying local, organic, seasonally sourced, even fair-trade food can have less damaging effects on the environment and has enjoyed a growing profile in recent years. However, the biggest impact that we make is not as easy to change. This is of course the consumption of meat and dairy.

A statistic that summarises this is that a vegan driving a 4×4 has a lower greenhouse gas output than a meat eater who rides a bicycle. This is according to research at the University of Chicago, where the relative carbon intensity of a standard vegan diet in comparison to a US-style carnivorous diet. It was found that a meat based diet emits the equivalent of 1.5 tonnes more CO2 than the standard vegan. (1) This might sound difficult to believe at first, and of course the amount of meat consumed and the amount of miles driven vary from person to person. But when the process is broken as to how a piece of meat or dairy arrives on our plates, it becomes clearer why there is such a significant impact.

Land resources, water consumed, the energy used in transporting and refrigerating, chemicals used on animal feed, all add up to a heavily resource intensive way to feed ourselves. Industrialised farming has become highly inefficient and with our ever increasing global population, the question will have to be asked whether the resources used on feeding animals that feed us would be better spent on food that goes to us directly.

Agriculture becomes more damaging in relation to global warming, when all green house gas emissions are taken into account. Livestock generates 65 percent of human-related nitrous oxide, which has 296 times the Global Warming Potential (GWP) of CO2. Methane is a gas that is 23 times more potent than carbon dioxide in contributing to climate change and according to a report carried out by United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, agriculture produces 37 percent of all human-induced methane. (2) Add this to the carbon dioxide produced from the energy used in the other areas of production, it becomes clearer just how damaging it can be.

With land resources, the issue relates to the limit of resources available. Livestock are often being fed food that could be used to feed humans on land that could be used much more efficiently to produce plant based food. With thousands dying each day from hunger related diseases, couldn’t the resources used to feed animals be put to a more urgent use? Another major disaster that has unfolded in Latin America where 70 percent of former forests in the Amazon have been turned over to grazing. (3)

Water use is perhaps the biggest concern. With fresh global water supplies running out, the amount that it takes to produce the meat we eat can explain how this happening. According to research carried out at Cornell University’s Ecology Department it takes 900 litres per kg of wheat, 3,500 litres per kg of digestible chicken flesh and a massive 100,000 litres for 1kg of beef. (4). There are other studies that estimate lower proportions of water. However what appears to be consistent is that amount that it takes to feed an animal far outweighs the amount that it takes to grow crops that we can directly eat.

As with anything, veganism is not flawless. Problems do arise when looking at locally produced sources of protein. The lentils, beans, nuts and seeds that so many rely on cannot be produced in a climate like Britain’s. Many of the meals that vegans enjoy and come to take for granted have had a long way to travel before they make it to our dinner plates. Whilst these are issues of concern, it doesn’t mean that they should be used against the overall sustainability that a vegan diet offers. When compared against the land, water, energy usage and greenhouse gas emissions, the distance that the food has travelled does not seem as damaging as when it is viewed in isolation. Like other ethical lifestyle choices, it is the least worst option.

It may seem daunting at first to give up all animal products. Many of the meals that most people love are meat or dairy based. After a bit of exploration however you can find a wealth of information on recipes, nutrition and other people’s experiences on becoming vegan. In the same way that vegetarianism was once obscure and at the margins of society, it has become a mainstream diet. The same can happen with veganism. If the thought of giving up meat and/or dairy is too big a step to think about, the first practical step is to cut down. Many people do find it hard to give up the things they like overnight and so it can be more of a gradual process.

The environmental argument for a vegan diet is not even the sole reason that many give for changing their eating habits. For many, animal welfare is the utmost concern and for others benefits to one’s health can also be convincing. Whatever the main reason for becoming vegan, it appears as if it will have to become more and more necessary if we are to continue feeding a growing population and hope to stop climate change.

References:
(1) http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2006/jan/04/guardiansocietysupplement3
(2) http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000448/index.html
(3) Ibid
(4) R. Goodland & D. Pimentel, ‘Sustainability and Integrity in the Agriculture Sector,’ Ecological Integrity: Integrating Environment, Conservation and Health, D. Pimentel, L. Westra, R. F. Noss (eds), Island Press, 2000 taken from http://www.vegansociety.com/html/environment/water/

http://www.lowflyzone.org

http://www.tourismconcern.org.uk

Tourism Concern fights exploitation in the global tourism industry. It’s an independent, non-industry based, UK charity.

http://www.responsibletravel.com

Not travelling at all would prevent the ecological impact of travelling but if you really must travel then try the above website.

Islands are drowning in the Indian Ocean, the great glaciers of the Himalayas melt in the heat – and the fate of the living on Planet Earth lies on an ever-sharpening knife edge. All hope lies in the human race, for they alone hold the power to determine the course of history…

(Exciting, eh?)

Global Warming used to be a special-interest issue, which only hippies and those well-off enough not to have any more pressing personal worries could afford to be concerned about. The greenhouse effect was just some theory about the ozone layer (or something) which could hardly take priority when there’s trouble at work, you’ve got three kids, the rent’s due and there’s repayments on your car to keep up. This rise in global temperature would be stopped by scientists and/or the government before too much damage was done and meantime it would make those summer holidays at North Berwick a lot more pleasant.
Today those same life pressures exist, as does a lot of the same public attitude to the subject. Unfortunately, the global warming situation, as portrayed by scientists across the world, has progressed and come to something of a head…
The scenario reads like the blurb of a fantasy novel, albeit bogged down by the details: Global temperatures are rising at an alarming rate due to high levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, released by human activity such as burning fossil fuels and deforestation. Since pre-industrial times the average temperature has gone up by 0.7 degrees celcius. Should this rise reach two degrees, devastating “runaway” global warming will ensue as certain barriers are overcome, such as the permafrost which traps methane (a very potent greenhouse gas) underground in huge Siberian peat bogs and the ice caps which cause some of the sun’s energy to be reflected, rather than absorbed. After the two degree threshold is breached, further warming will be impossible to avert and global temperatures will continue to rise past three degrees, four degrees, five degrees and beyond. Such an increase would ravage the planet’s ecosystem causing widespread water shortage, a global net food deficit, violent conflict over scarce resources, the spread of tropical disease, the collapse of the world economy and death and misery on a scale never approached in any war, plague famine or genocide the world has ever seen.
Global warming is no longer for hippies and yuppies. It is a humanitarian issue, a health issue, a survival issue.
We have an ultimatum. The emission of greenhouse gas must be reduced enough to prevent the temperature rising past the critical point, before it’s too late. Various figures are quoted as to what level of reduction this entails, all within the range of the 50-85% by 2050 recommended by the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC), the leading authority on the subject. George Monbiot (a long time campaigner and expert), however, sets the time limit a little closer: 60% by 2030.
What is clear is that changes will have to be made. Small individual reductions in how much we fly, drive, heat and power will make a difference but these alone will not suffice in decreasing greenhouse gas emissions by the requisite amount. Governments around the world must set national limits and stick to these by regulating carbon-intense industry, revolutionising public transport and investing in carbon-free, renewable energy technologies.
At the time of writing, the UN Conference on Climate Change conference in Bali, Indonesia, has just finished, with member states having agreed upon a “roadmap” to reach another agreement in 2012. This preliminary agreement , accepted by the US only after they were roundly booed by the other delegates, does not include a binding absolute carbon dioxide reduction but merely states that “deep cuts in global emissions” are required – language far too vague to mean anything significant.
This outcome illustrates why the world cannot rely on its governments to pull their weight in tackling this great challenge of their own accord. What is required is a worldwide citizens’ consensus on the severity and immediacy of global warming and constant public pressure on those in power to do everything in their means to stop it massacring all life on the planet.
From 16th-24th February this year, a UK-wide week of action on global warming, organised by People and Planet, will take place: Go Green Week. There will be demonstrations, parades, films, free energy-saving light bulbs and fights between people in costumes made from cardboard boxes…all with intention of providing students and citizens alike with the means and incentive to reduce their own carbon emissions and join the movement to defeat this enemy of all mankind, which threatens destruction on a scale Sauron could only dream about.
Please help make this event awesome by bringing your ideas and organisation skills along to People and Planet Society meetings (Tuesdays 7:30pm, Union meeting rooms) or by emailing peopleandplanet_dundee@yahoogroups.com
Look out for more articles on global warming and Go Green Week in Next month’s Magdalen.

“I wish it need not have happened in my time,” said Frodo. “So do I,” said Gandalf, “and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.”

http://www.storyofstuff.com/anotherway.html

http://www.storyofstuff.com

The photo is of the result of the 260km/hour cyclone Sidr, which hit Bangladesh on 15 November 2007.

Rich countries are responsible for climate change through pollution and carbon emission but poor countries are paying the price and will keep paying the price.

Over 160,000 people already die each year because of climate change.

U.K. flying has more climate change impact than cars. The U.K. gives a £10.4 billion subsidy to the aviation industry every year!

The world must reduce carbon emission by 80% by 2050 but the rich countries are not keen.

1% (66 million people) of the world population (6.6 billion people) own 40% of the wealth.

10% (660 million people) of the world population own 90% of the wealth.

The remaining 90% (5.94 billion people) of the world population squabble over the remaining 10% of the wealth.

Amongst these 5.94 billion people, 3 billion people live on less than $2 a day and 1.3 billion people live on less than $1 a day. 1 billion people still have no access to clean water.

Rich countries owe 27 times more in ‘carbon debt’ than poor countries pay in debt repayments to wealthy nations. http://www.jubileedebtcampaign.org.uk/?lid=3337

6 October 2007 – World Overshoot Day. We have been living beyond our means since 1987: http://www.footprintnetwork.org/gfn_sub.php?content=overshoot

Calculate your ecological footprint: http://ecofoot.org

Due to global climate chage, the sea-level is rising. If the sea-level rises by 14 metres, most of Bangladesh will be under water. As will be most other coastal regions around the world: http://flood.firetree.net