Ecological Footprint

Welcome to UKHIppy2764@2x.png

UKHippy is a long running online community and of likeminded people exploring all interpretations on what it means to be living an alternative lifestyle -- we welcome discussions on everything related to sustainability, the environment, alternative spirituality, music, festivals, politics and more -- membership of this website is free but supported by the community.

  • Quote from matthew

    Atomic... this is the kinda attitude the majority of people have. It does matter what the individual does. Combined, it makes a huge difference.

    No it doesn't. Not when the drive coming from government and industry is still to grow and consume. It's pissing into the wind.

    Quote

    I can agree i think this 'test' is not that accurate, but i also think it indicates a trend. I think some have had a result that suggests more about their 'bad habits' than they would like to admit. I CAN SAY THIS CUZ MY 'FOOTPRINT' IS OF one PLANET :angel: .

    ... thus demonstrating my point about smug complacency. ;)


    Quote

    Over one, pushing onto two maybe three [planets] is saying something about you that is uncomftable.

    Is it fuck. It's utterly meaningless. It takes no account of circumstance or a whole variety of other lifestyle factors. It's utter bollocks.

  • Quote from Coyote

    That "increased" standard of living has come at the cost of massive bias in resource use; dont you think its a little disengenuous to offer it to the rest of the world if it aint sustainable for those who already have it?



    ''WE'' have gone a tad [putting it mildly] overboard with our 'standard of living'. I meant a relatively humble but more profound 'standard of living'. This includes education and opportunities outside villages. These villages are in the most part in abject poverty. It seems it should raise the level of the standard of living. Obviously i did not mean every person in China driving SUVs and such. Just not one room for 6 people etc.

    Quote

    And thats before we get to the environmental impact of supplying it as a short-term "bribe"....



    So you think increased ecomomical strengh and opportunity has not lifted millions out of poverty ?. I don't consider raising peoples standard of living a 'bribe'. Imho as 'cheap jobs' are expanded into what individual countries are good at.. and say I.T or 'better' jobs are available an it becomes a major career path. ''Cheap jobs'' are exported from one country to the next. As long as good working practices and a good standard of health and safety etc [what all workers strive for] is observed i don't see a big issue. Ofcourse in certain countries they are not used to giving their workers rights and the observance of health and safety is lax. As long as these countries learn from the errors of past industrial growth. More power to them.

    Quote


    :rolleyes:



    Well , we all have a bit of paranoia in us. ;)

  • Quote


    Originally Posted by Atomik thus demonstrating my point about smug complacency. ;)



    I was just trying to get you to respond and post your footprint. It has not worked yet.

    Quote


    Is it fuck. It's utterly meaningless. It takes no account of circumstance or a whole variety of other lifestyle factors. It's utter bollocks.



    None of our other circumstances are taken into account. I never said it was perfect. I just said it could indicate a trend. Fair enough if you don't think so. I only wanted you to respond.. again it has not worked.

  • Quote from matthew



    None of our other circumstances are taken into account. I never said it was perfect. I just said it could indicate a trend. .

    It is not even that. It so superficial as to be irrelevant.

  • Quote from Matthew

    So you think increased ecomomical strengh and opportunity has not lifted millions out of poverty ?


    I was speaking more of the way the western lifestyle is waved like a carrot "ideal" before the third world as if to say (if you'll pardon the borrowing from a certain religion) "all this could be yours if only you fall down and worship me"...:whistle:


    Quote

    I don't consider raising peoples standard of living a 'bribe'. Imho as 'cheap jobs' are expanded into what individual countries are good at.. and say I.T or 'better' jobs are available an it becomes a major career path. ''Cheap jobs'' are exported from one country to the next. As long as good working practices and a good standard of health and safety etc [what all workers strive for] is observed i don't see a big issue. Ofcourse in certain countries they are not used to giving their workers rights and the observance of health and safety is lax. As long as these countries learn from the errors of past industrial growth. More power to them.


    http://www.newint.org/issue324/forced.htm


    A little perspective on economic development from someone I dont necessarily with on politics but who makes a very good point or 3 here.

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • Quote from Coyote

    I was speaking more of the way the western lifestyle is waved like a carrot "ideal" before the third world as if to say (if you'll pardon the borrowing from a certain religion) "all this could be yours if only you fall down and worship me"...:whistle:



    mmm well i think poor countries want education .. clean water and brighter prospects. If that is what they 'worship' about us.. Let them. I understand that we are not the best role models on mamny many levels.. It is there choice what to take or leave imho.



    Quote



    Quote


    Merely being exposed to this way of life - whether through pictures in magazines, or movies, or stories you got from your cousin who scrubs floors at the local Hilton - would cause the scales to fall from your eyes, after which you would drop everything (culture, tradition, values, whatever) to have it.



    I don't want 'under-developed' countries to mirror out glut and pomposity.. no no no. All i'm saying is that with out some form of development and lift out of the economical dead end many face. The the basic standard of living / education and life expectancy ... will never be achieved.

    You can't imagine people wish to remain at the point they are at now ?.

    I wonder how many people in England would like to live like we did in the tail end of the 19th century.

    Imho that is what 'under-developed' countries will say in 100 years .. IF they imho make the right choice and move forward rather than stagnate.

  • Quote from matthew

    mmm well i think poor countries want education .. clean water and brighter prospects.


    They mostly had perfectly good lives before the capitalist west showed up and started fucking them and their lands over on an industrial scale..... Its an arrogance of modern life which assumes anything that went before was a hobbesian nightmare....a necessary perspective to keep the industrial economic "arms race" going but beyond that a blatant case of propaganda for the "development" of the "underdeveloped" lands....


    Quote

    If that is what they 'worship' about us.. Let them. I understand that we are not the best role models on mamny many levels.. It is there choice what to take or leave imho.


    The worshop is the hommage they must pay the west to be granted such "acts of (alleged) grace".

    Quote

    You can't imagine people wish to remain at the point they are at now ?.

    I wonder how many people in England would like to live like we did in the tail end of the 19th century.


    But then they are always told the only way that is offered is "forwards" and never "backwards" relative to their current position....even though backwards may offer a far better life than forwards.

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."



  • This is i imagine applies to the country A when country B recieves country A previous jobs they now want country B to do cheaper . I imagine it will again apply when country B gives country C their jobs that can be done cheaper than country B.

    This i think is a good thing.. but the template i agree could have been made badly and is due for a re-design.

    Maybe backwards is a better way.. all i'm saying is a relative firm footing with certain key [forward thinking/ 'modern' ammenities and levels of education] components , can't be a bad thing.

  • Quote from matthew


    I am on purpose limiting what i say to clean water education and a brighter future. I'm not suggesting fast cars loose women and Channel 5 being broadcast to the unsuspecting blighters..


    Well, a brighter future is a rather open statement; many folks think bringing them into the global market would offer that....

    Quote

    The majority [it seems] of Africans don't want to live in mud huts and drop dead at 20.


    If they are anything like most of the westerners they are learning to ape, they no longer know what they want other than "progress" (which is part of why there are so many depressed folks here in the west; as soon as they get what they are told is some kind of holy grail, they find out it wasnt afterall but that there is a new one to chase...(so off they go again)).


    Quote

    This.. i imagine applies to the country A ...[W]hen country B recieves country A previous jobs they now want country B to do [them] cheaper . I imagine it will again apply when country B gives country C their jobs that can be done cheaper than country B.


    "Shag thy neighbour" as each successive country is made inferior servant to the latter :rolleyes:

    Quote

    This i think is a good thing..


    :eek:


    :rolleyes:


    Quote

    Maybe backwards is a better way.. all i'm saying is a relative firm footing with certain key [forward thinking/ 'modern' ammenities and levels of education] components , can't be a bad thing.


    Water, food, shelter, basic healthcare and hygiene all locally and sustainably sourced and none of which needing an international or even national market or "development"...

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • Quote from matthew

    None of our other circumstances are taken into account. I never said it was perfect. I just said it could indicate a trend.

    I don't believe it can. I think it's entirely without value. I also think it falsely lays the burden at the door of the citizen rather than government and industry. It is, in short, bollocks.

  • Quote from Coyote

    Well, a brighter future is a rather open statement; many folks think bringing them into the global market would offer that....



    Well i'd agree. It still requires a certain level of 'progress' and some of the e.gs of basic reqirements i have said.


    Quote

    If they are anything like most of the westerners they are learning to ape, they no longer know what they want other than "progress" (which is part of why there are so many depressed folks here in the west; as soon as they get what they are told is some kind of holy grail, they find out it wasnt afterall but that there is a new one to chase...(so off they go again)).



    I'm not talking of the obssesions and the idiocy of what some of us 'westerners' do.. I'm talking about simple standards of living. I'm not said it is a good thing toi worship our way of living. I've just said countries need development for the basics.

    Quote

    "Shag thy neighbour" as each successive country is made inferior servant to the latter :rolleyes:



    Something like that.. eventualy there will be no one else to shag.. and the inferioty [even though i don't quite agree with your language] will be effectively gone. It is true it will take some countries a while to accept the basic rights of all people. Like i said :

    ''As long as these countries learn from the errors of past industrial growth. More power to them.''

    It can be achieved. then we all have a resonable jobs prospects.. and a 'decent' standard of living.


    Quote


    Water, food, shelter, basic healthcare and hygiene all locally and sustainably sourced and none of which needing an international or even national market or "development"...



    It still takes money, decent jobs to provide taxes etc. These things don't spring out of the air. If you could tell me how ''none of which needing an international or even national market or "development"...'' is feasible , then i'll be happy to hear it. I can't think of any country that does not use global or national markets, with millions of inhabitants.

  • Quote from Atomik

    I don't believe it can. I think it's entirely without value.





    Quote


    I also think it falsely lays the burden at the door of the citizen rather than government and industry. It is, in short, bollocks.



    We all do have a 'footprint'.. that can't be denied. How it is measured is i agree can be flawed. It is not some random thing that some kid put together http://www.footprintnetwork.or…sub.php?content=standards
    http://www.kingston.gov.uk/browse/environment.htm. It will get better.

    We all have responsibilities, government and industry an us. If not then why bother living the life you do. Why bother recycling and all the other things you do.

  • Quote from matthew

    We all do have a 'footprint'.. that can't be denied. How it is measured is i agree can be flawed. It is not some random thing that some kid put together

    It's still childishly simplistic.


    Quote

    We all have responsibilities, government and industry an us.

    The problem is, the burden is being laid firmly at the door of the ordinary citizen. Why, for example, should the government tax car use heavily without meeting their responsibility to provide adequate public transport alternatives? Why, for example, should the average citizen be lectured on turning appliances off 'stand by' when supermarkets are allowed to leave their doors wide open in the depths of winter, with heated air blasting out into the cold night? I find it distasteful that the citizen is being guilt-tripped about thier environmental impact when industry and government are doing so little about theirs. Bottom line is the citizen can reduce their impact all they want, and it won't make fuck-all difference unless government and industry get up to speed pretty fucking quickly. Ethical consumerism and lifestyles aren't gonna save the world.


    Quote

    If not then why bother living the life you do. Why bother recycling and all the other things you do.

    Simple. I detest being part of the destruction, so I distance myself as best I'm able. I don't kid myself that it'll make any difference though. It's a personal comfort zone thing.

  • Quote from Atomik

    It's still childishly simplistic.



    Fair enough.. i won't bash my head against that wall anymore.

    Quote

    The problem is, the burden is being laid firmly at the door of the ordinary citizen. Why, for example, should the government tax car use heavily without meeting their responsibility to provide adequate public transport alternatives? Why, for example, should the average citizen be lectured on turning appliances off 'stand by' when supermarkets are allowed to leave their doors wide open in the depths of winter, with heated air blasting out into the cold night? I find it distasteful that the citizen is being guilt-tripped about thier environmental impact when industry and government are doing so little about theirs. Bottom line is the citizen can reduce their impact all they want, and it won't make fuck-all difference unless government and industry get up to speed pretty fucking quickly. Ethical consumerism and lifestyles aren't gonna save the world.



    Imho the 'burden' is not being placed firmly on our shoulders. Infact we don't get forced to do much. If industy and goverment had the same attitude as ''well the public don't do shit, why should we'' . then were would we be ?. I'm sure you waded through your fair share of goverment/industry strategies/reports etc etc. Independant bodies working in partnership with this and that. It all goes un-noticed to a large degree. I'M SUPRISED AT YOUR CYNICISM.

    Quote


    Simple. I detest being part of the destruction, so I distance myself as best I'm able. I don't kid myself that it'll make any difference though. It's a personal comfort zone thing.



    Well if more people did what you do, then there would be a big difference.

  • Quote from matthew

    Imho the 'burden' is not being placed firmly on our shoulders.

    Uhhhhh... yes it is. All the proposed taxation measures are end-user taxes as far as I'm aware. And it's the end-user who's being held accountable for their consumption.


    Quote

    If industy and goverment had the same attitude as ''well the public don't do shit, why should we'' . then were would we be ?

    About where we are now.


    Quote

    I'm sure you waded through your fair share of goverment/industry strategies/reports etc etc. Independant bodies working in partnership with this and that. It all goes un-noticed to a large degree. I'M SUPRISED AT YOUR CYNICISM.

    The day shops are forced.. or even encouraged... to simply shut their doors in winter, then I'll be slightly less cynical. Until then, it all looks like a ploy to dump the burden of guilt on the consumer, for fuck-all real benefit. I don't see any sign of industry and government taking their responsibilities seriously. Just lip service.



    Well if more people did what you do, then there would be a big difference.

  • Quote from Atomik

    Uhhhhh... yes it is. All the proposed taxation measures are end-user taxes as far as I'm aware. And it's the end-user who's being held accountable for their consumption.



    Not true..

    Quote

    About where we are now.



    *sigh*

    Quote

    The day shops are forced.. or even encouraged... to simply shut their doors in winter, then I'll be slightly less cynical. Until then, it all looks like a ploy to dump the burden of guilt on the consumer, for fuck-all real benefit. I don't see any sign of industry and government taking their responsibilities seriously. Just lip service.


    I think the the massive leap forwards in energy conservation .. Puts 'shutting doors' into the shade. No doubt the idea is a good one. It would improve 'energy effieciency'.. but behind the scenes vast amounts are done. I don't think you think when you see a supermarket with there doors shut, in winter time .. they are a paragon of energy effiecency, do you ?. The picture is bigger than that.

  • Quote from matthew

    Not true..

    Oh yes it is. :rolleyes:

    Quote

    I think the the massive leap forwards in energy conservation .. Puts 'shutting doors' into the shade.

    Oh for fuck's sake. How utterly ridiculous! I can't believe you're justifying supermarkets pissing energy into the winds in the same breath as telling us that consumers are responsible for energy consumption!


    Quote

    No doubt the idea is a good one. It would improve 'energy effieciency'.. but behind the scenes vast amounts are done.

    What's done is done for cost saving - not for environmental benefit.


    Quote

    I don't think you think when you see a supermarket with there doors shut, in winter time .. they are a paragon of energy effiecency, do you ?. The picture is bigger than that.

    Of course the picture's bigger. But if they can't even get the simplest of things right, what hope with the bigger things? I frankly find your defence of our wasteful and polluting industries absolutely breathtaking.


    Bottom line... the day that governments and industry are forced into energy saving and low-impact practices, then there's be a case for compelling the consumer in a similar fashion. Until then, all you're doing is closing the door after the horse has bolted.

  • Quote from Atomik

    Oh yes it is. :rolleyes:



    Oh no it aint.

    Quote

    Oh for fuck's sake. How utterly ridiculous! I can't believe you're justifying supermarkets pissing energy into the winds in the same breath as telling us that consumers are responsible for energy consumption!



    To be honest the supermarkets i go to, either have electronic doors that shut after you, or they have spring loaded doors that do the same thing. In some you have areas inbetween the outside and the inside, usualy used for toilets, or where they have the promotions. I've rarely seen supermarkets with there doors wide open.

    Quote

    What's done is done for cost saving - not for environmental benefit.



    This is true to a degree, it still helps with customer realations and better business kudos. That is one of the reasons i energy save as well. I'm not going to defend each and every supermarket.. or business. I'm sure some are and some are not worried about the enviroment. it is more to do with saving money.

    Quote

    Of course the picture's bigger. But if they can't even get the simplest of things right, what hope with the bigger things? I frankly find your defence of our wasteful and polluting industries absolutely breathtaking.



    I've seen far to much to start worrying about if a door is left open..

    Quote


    Bottom line... the day that governments and industry are forced into energy saving and low-impact practices, then there's be a case for compelling the consumer in a similar fashion.



    They are to a certain extent, go google it. ;)

  • Quote from matthew

    Oh no it aint.

    Oh yes it is. And she's behind you. :whistle:

    Quote

    I've rarely seen supermarkets with there doors wide open.

    Not only do we have supermarkets with doors wide open, but also an outdoor shopping centre with a policy that prohibits unit holders from closing doors because it doesn't give out a "friendly and welcoming" image.

  • When I worked for a large high street chain last year, it was company policy to keep doors open, even in the middle of winter.

  • Quote from Sthenno

    When I worked for a large high street chain last year, it was company policy to keep doors open, even in the middle of winter.



    I've seen this policy in operation too and the same again when I worked for a caterers/cafe. Energy efficency is a secondary concern when there's money to be made in the short term.

    Who needs to save the planet for tomorrow or your children when you can drive a fast car and buy a big house today!?

    When I'm on my death bed am I really going to wish I spent more time in the office?

  • Why save energy and prevent staff contracting hypothermia when you can sell more stuff instead? And so on and so forth…

  • Quote from Atomik

    Oh yes it is. And she's behind you. :whistle:



    I only jest because we don't know the full tax burden that may be placed on us, till the budget.

    Quote


    Not only do we have supermarkets with doors wide open, but also an outdoor shopping centre with a policy that prohibits unit holders from closing doors because it doesn't give out a "friendly and welcoming" image.




    Well, i've seen small individual retail outlets with there doors open. they i'm sure are innuficient in there ennergy consumption and waste. The point of me not overtly being concerned is becaue major retailers work on a whole business effieciency programme. It might be the case that doors are left open. It would depend how much energy these stores were producing, and how much impact that [open doors] made overall. If they have a wanton disregard of these issues. Then that is one thing. If it is just like leaving your window slightly open while have a progress and upto date power/heat/energy management system overall. Then i can't get to worked up. Like i said i've seen too many programmes were companys are doing well even brilliantly. Yes maybe some due to economical reasons, so what ?... ..

  • Quote from matthew

    Well, i've seen small individual retail outlets with there doors open. they i'm sure are innuficient in there ennergy consumption and waste. The point of me not overtly being concerned is becaue major retailers work on a whole business effieciency programme. It might be the case that doors are left open. It would depend how much energy these stores were producing, and how much impact that [open doors] made overall.

    But the point here is that the calculation they're making is a cost-benefit calculation, not an environmental or ethical one. If the sales increaes from an open-door policy outweigh the cost of wasted energy, then the doors stay open. Industry doesn't give two shits about the environment, so long as it doesn't affect costs.


    Quote

    Yes maybe some due to economical reasons, so what ?... ..

    Because if their only concern is economics, then they'll continue with destructive practices until there's a cost benefit to be made from abandoning them.

  • Quote from Atomik

    But the point here is that the calculation they're making is a cost-benefit calculation, not an environmental or ethical one. If the sales increaes from an open-door policy outweigh the cost of wasted energy, then the doors stay open. Industry doesn't give two shits about the environment, so long as it doesn't affect costs.



    You have a fair point, again i've just not seen many major supermarkets with a 'open door policy'. Supposedly per square foot major retail box units, regardless of sales . Are energy efficient with there doors open. The size makes the energy leakage a miniscule detail. I had some info on it but it was yesterday, and it was American. I did not feel it was fair to post some detail from a American wal-mart energy study.

    Quote


    Because if their only concern is economics, then they'll continue with destructive practices until there's a cost benefit to be made from abandoning them.



    If they continualy reduce there energy expensenses year on year. It will not ultimately matter if some stores within certain chaines have the policy you highlight. i can understand them doing that policy in summer. Winter ?.. i'm not so sure. If your economical cost benefit is reduced. they will just shut the doors.

    Some retailers even have wind turbines and other renewable programmes in place. Still for economical reasons, no doubt.. but i'd also like to think for ethical reasons as well.

    What store/s / open markets have are you talking about anyway ?.

    I think you might have found some bad apples... i dunno ?.

  • Quote from Sthenno

    When I worked for a large high street chain last year, it was company policy to keep doors open, even in the middle of winter.



    Who was it ?.. Marks and Spencers ?.

  • Quote from matthew

    Who was it ?.. Marks and Spencers ?.


    No, although I’m under the impression that M&S operates a similar policy.

  • Quote from matthew

    You have a fair point, again i've just not seen many major supermarkets with a 'open door policy'. Supposedly per square foot major retail box units, regardless of sales . Are energy efficient with there doors open. The size makes the energy leakage a miniscule detail. I had some info on it but it was yesterday, and it was American. I did not feel it was fair to post some detail from a American wal-mart energy study.

    I don't see how you can piss energy into the wind and call that "miniscule".

    Quote

    If they continualy reduce there energy expensenses year on year. It will not ultimately matter if some stores within certain chaines have the policy you highlight. i can understand them doing that policy in summer. Winter ?.. i'm not so sure.

    Of course it matters. It's still wasted energy.

  • Quote from Atomik

    I don't see how you can piss energy into the wind and call that "miniscule".


    :madlol:

  • Quote from Sthenno

    No, although I’m under the impression that M&S operates a similar policy.



    I don't know

    No doubt i have seen some companys do it.. i don't dispute that.