Take the "Environmental Footprint Quiz"

[DarkPhenyx]

http://www.earthday.net/footprint/index.asp

I'm 35 acres and 8.5 planets. OK, I feel worse about myself.

[La_Serpiente]

1. Mines is

24 acres and 2.4 planets

[DarkPhenyx]

2. Not bad!

I'm going to have to look at way I can improve my score. Driving the truck isn't helping I know. Also I just can't bring myself to live in an apartment again.

I thought I was doing good before I took this test

[La_Serpiente]

3. I'm sure

you would do better than any other Republican out there. I don't blame you for the truck...I blame the auto companies and the CAFE standards.

I wouldn't mind doing a boycott of American made products until they create more environmentally friendly automobiles.

I am still waiting for Honda to put out a Hybrid Accord though.

[NNadir]

4. 24 acres, 4.9 planets.

I don't understand how 24 acres can be less than three planets.

[theoceansnerves]

5. i've taken this before

i just retook it, 7 acres and 1.6 planets, and i know i could do even better than that :/

[blindpig]

6. i'm so bad.........................................................

45 acres, 10 planets! guess cause of the big, 30yr old brick rancher...but, but it's really cheap on climate control yaddayadda
Seriously, shouldn't there be some consideration for breeding? The last thing this planet needs is more people Or would that not be PC?

[NNadir]

8. Fewer people on the planet is desirable.

The planet is already way above it's carrying capacity, and I believe that some type of collapse is not only possible, but is becoming increasingly likely.

There is a sort of catch-22 here though. It is well established now that the best way to lower birthrates below replacement values is to increase personal wealth. However, it would probably destroy the planet to provide that wealth to all of the people.

I personally think that responsible people limit themselves to one or two children, especially if they live in the first world. Population shortages in the absence of racism can be easily made up by immigration.

[Redneck Socialist]

7. 18 acres, 4.1 planets

After reading all y'alls posts I don't feel so bad. I know I could do a lot better though.

[happyslug]

9. 23 Acres, 5.2 planets

I still have to use my car to get to the Court house (23 miles away from where I live), other than that I only use my car when I go out of town.

[bobja]

10. 2.2 acres and 2.6 planets

I gotta work on my planets

[Polemonium]

11. 7.1 hectares, 3.9 planets

Bummer, five years ago when I was still a starving college kid I only devoured 1.9 planets. It ain't easy being green.

[LARED]

12. Very strange quiz

I answered the questions for where I live and then pretended to live in Australia and answered the same way. Apparently living in the US got me a score more than twice as high of what I would if living in Australia even though I consumed the same.

[seekerofwisdom]

13. 4.3 Acres 2.4 planets

Seems my biggest problem is eating packaged produce and meat.

I guess that makes sense when one thinks about the resources used to raise livestock.

Thats a shocking stat, 1.8 productive acres per person. I expect those in developed countries use a lot but even so, its sobering.

[brainshrub]

14. Total: 26!

CATEGORY ACRES

FOOD 5.9

MOBILITY 3.5

SHELTER 6.9

GOODS/SERVICES 9.4

TOTAL FOOTPRINT 26



IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.

WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.




IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 5.8 PLANETS.