Quiz results: Ecological Footprint Quiz by Redefining Progress

Click the link below to view the results of my first footprint assessment. I needed 4.58 Earths!

Quiz results: Ecological Footprint Quiz by Redefining Progress (OLD)


When calculating my new and improved footprint, I found out that I now need 3.85 Earths to sustain my lifestyle. Still, this is not that impressive, and it will surely take more than recycling, composting, eating better, saving energy, etc. to help reduce our impact on Earth. Here are some charts to break down my consumption a little bit more.

http://www.myfootprint.org/en/quiz_results/#wview (NEW RESULTS)



I have seen all of my consumption categories go down since the last assessment, which proves that my new sustainability goals are proving to be beneficial towards our environment. The easiest reduction strategy for me to get a hold of was turning off lights, appliances, and water sources when they were not in use. The hardest, however, was getting my food footprint down. Eating less meat and restaurant food is especially tough when you are a college student with a good appetite. I helped this out by reducing my large meals to one a day (which saves me money), and eating more PB&J sandwiches for lunch with cereal for breakfast. Last, I was also able to compost more with my neighbor who will be taking this sludge to grow vegetables and herbs in our backyards during the spring. It should be pretty cool to see it come around full cycle. I am proud of my efforts this quarter to reduce my impact, but I do know that it is still not enough. In the future, I will keep what I have learned in this class in mind to make the best choices possible.

For Most, Marketing Budgets Flat This Holiday

http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=118154

This article discusses hot marketing budgets are being cut in this holiday season. Even though ad prices are down in our hurt economy, retailers are trying to cut costs in order to offer consumers products at highly discounted prices. Company's are pulling back most on the advertising of their green products. Even though "greentailing" is in, consumers have a perception that these products will cost more and will likely not be interested in purchasing them. Value is the key to success for retailers this time around.

UK hosts conference on green marketing

http://www.kentucky.com/101/story/1039541.html

The University of Kentucky will be hosting a green marketing convention as a product of their Von Allmen Center for Green Marketing. "The daylong conference will discuss research in the field and brings in speakers including Ray Harishankar, an IBM Fellow who will offer a speech titled Sustainability and a Smarter Planet." The center for green marketing opened in 2008 in an effort for the school to get a head start on the green marketing frontier. I think it is an awesome idea that universities get on board with these type of programs and hope that WWU will soon do so as well.

Top 10 Green Giants

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2007/fortune/0703/gallery.green_giants.fortune/10.html

According to Fortune Magazine, the top ten green corporations are

1)Honda
2)Continental Airlines
3)Suncor
4)Tesco
5)Alcan
6)PG&E
7) S.C. Johnson
8)Goldman Sachs
9)Swiss RE
10)Hewlett-Packard

Ski communities taxed for sustainable marketing??!

http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20091101/NEWS/911019999/1077&ParentProfile=1058

In order to stay in the competition, Breckenridge is proposing a tax increase to their local communities in order to gain more funds for green marketing. They have stated that the tax increases will drive people to their communities and it gives me the perception that they are treating them as an investment. Community officials are fighting back, arguing that not enough money is going to the services that they should be concerned with most such as snowplowing.

I believe that in order for Breckenridge to grow, they will need to work on their marketing efforts, but taxing the community won't be the easiest way to get it done. Most residents wont understand that marketing will truly be an investment for them, and without it their businesses wouldn't be running in the first place. Breckenridge will have to think up a more influential proposal fast or be prepared to cut costs in other areas.

New Library of LEED Pilot Credits

http://www.jetsongreen.com/2009/11/new-leed-pilot-credits.html

This article discusses how the United States Green Building Council (USGBC) has unveiled six new credits for LEED that are currently being investigated in a pilot program. These new credits include Life Cycle Assessment of Building Assemblies and Materials; PBT Source Reduction; Medical and Process Equipment Efficiency; Innovative Ventilation; and Preliminary Integrative Project Planning & Design. "The new credits address gaps in the current LEED system and enable designers and builders to incorporate new methods and improved materials in buildings."

The new life cycle analysis for building assemblies and materials interested me as we have been discussing the LCA in our last couple of classes. Understanding not only what materials go into making buildings, but how they get there and how they are disposed of will be important for people to see.

All of the programs included in the pilot are intended to keep LEED up to date in the green market, which is ever important as it changes and improves daily.

Should Eco-Labels Come from Government or Third Party Private Organizations?

http://www.triplepundit.com/2009/10/shoudl-eco-labels-be-government-based-or-third-party-private-organizations/comment-page-1/

This article discusses the current difficulty consumers face when deciphering which eco-labels are the best. According to ecolabbeling.org, there are currently around 300 eco-labels out there right now, and that number is on the rise. The author of the article discusses how he can only name around 20 or so off the top of his head, and he's a sustainability consultant and green business writer! There are too many eco-labels out there.

There needs to be a third party watching to make sure that these labels stay truthful to their claims if they are good, and to throw out the greenwashers if they are bad. Consumers are currently facing much confusion when buying products, and they are usually under/mis-informed about what they are even buying. They need to be educated about what actually is put into their products.

Footprint Re-evaluation

So far, I have been doing an alright job of cutting down on my poor consumption habits. I have been taking shorter showers than ever before, composting in my neighbors bin, and eating at home as much as possible. Cutting down on the amount of meat that I eat is still the hardest thing for me to do. I have been eating lunch meat on the regular in sandwiches since it is so convenient for a quick and tasty lunch. Because of this, my new goal will be to eat more PB&J sandwiches over the next month. I don't mind skipping on the meat during lunch time, and I find PB&J's to be good anyway. Also, I'm going to find healthier soaps and shampoos to use when I shower after looking at www.cosmeticsdatabase.com last week. Kinda scary stuff... I'll keep you posted on any good ones that I find!

http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/product/2495/Barbasol_Beard_Buster_Thick_%26_Rich_Shaving_Cream%2C_Original/

I have chosen Barbasol “Beard Buster” Thick & Rich Shaving Cream to analyze on this assignment. The shaving cream contains water, stearic acid, triethanolamine, Isobutane, Laureth-23, Fragrance, Propane, and Sodium Lauryl Sulfate.

According to the cosmetic database, my shaving cream scored a 4 on the hazard score rating. This hazard score means that some of the ingredients in the shaving cream are known to be harmful on the websites databases. Ingredients in my product are linked to cancer, developmental and reproductive toxicity, governmental violations &/or restrictions, Allergies/immunotoxicity, and other irritants or toxins.
Breakdown of Ingredients
FRAGRANCE: Neurotoxicity, Allergies/immunotoxicity, Miscellaneous
ISOBUTANE: Allergies/immunotoxicity, Multiple, additive exposure sources, Irritation (skin, eyes, or lungs), Contamination concerns
TRIETHANOLAMINE: Allergies/immunotoxicity, Organ system toxicity (non-reproductive), Irritation (skin, eyes, or lungs), Contamination concerns
LAURETH-23: Neurotoxicity, Organ system toxicity (non-reproductive), Irritation (skin, eyes, or lungs), Contamination concerns
PROPANE: Allergies/immunotoxicity, Multiple, additive exposure sources, Irritation (skin, eyes, or lungs), Occupational hazards
STEARIC ACID: Neurotoxicity, Irritation (skin, eyes, or lungs)
SODIUM LAURYL SULFATE: Organ system toxicity (non-reproductive), Irritation (skin, eyes, or lungs)
WATER: innocuous

Thankfully, I wasn’t able to find any of these ingredients in the OED book. The list in OED had substances that were both harmful to humans and our surrounding ecosystem. However, I feel that some of my ingredients are harmful to the ecosystem as well since they are strong enough to harm a human being. I feel bad now that every time I shave I am rinsing all of the toxins down the drain, where they could go out and harm our outside world. I will try my best to find a shaving cream that is all natural (I know they’re out there), which will lead to a healthier lifestyle for me and the environment.

Coca-Cola urges consumers to recycle....

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/sep/21/green-marketing-lucy-barrett
and
http://www.carbonreductioncommitment.info/

This article discusses Coca-Cola's poor efforts to prepare for the UK's Carbon Reduction Commitment, a mandatory CO2 emission trading scheme imposed in April 2010. "The aim of the Carbon Reduction Commitment is to reduce the level of carbon emissions currently produced by the larger 'low energy-intensive' organisations by approximately 1.2 million tonnes of CO2 per year by 2020. As a Climate Change Bill commiment, the scheme is aiming for a 60% redution in CO2 emissions by 2050."
Coca-Cola's effort to prepare for the CRC has been to tell consumers to recycle.. They launched a group called "Keep It Going - Recycle", in a seemingly last ditch effort to appear green. As stated in the article, Coke should be a leader on the green movement. They do have the ability to make a difference. They could focus on reducing their carbon footprint before reminding consumers to reduce theirs, let alone recycle. Coke has some work to do in the future if they want to be taken seriously as a company that cares.

I'm currently about a week in on reducing my ecological footprint. The hardest challenge so far is limiting the amount of food that I consume from restaurants. Three of my roommates work at restaurants around Bellingham, and they tend to bring home food for other roommates on the regular. However, I can't decide if this is a negative or positive impact on the environment. The food brought home is usually leftover soup and bread that would have been thrown out anyway, but it also regularly contains meat and is prepared in an environment that has a much larger ecological footprint than my house ever would. I've come across a pretty big dilemma. In the end, eating free and delicious food helps me save money that I would be spending on groceries anyway. It will be hard to pass up.

My Ecological Footprint Quiz Results

http://www.myfootprint.org/en/your_results/?id=643069

After taking my ecological footprint quiz, i was surprised to find out that if everyone on the planet lived my lifestyle, we would need 4.58 Earths! It was a bit more than I had expected, as I live in an older bellingham house with 7 other roommates that care about the environment and try to help in as many ways as we can. We recycle, turn the lights off, carpool, etc., but I still am consuming over four times what I should be in order to live a sustainable lifestyle. I have much to learn..

The findings showed that my total footprint would take up 177.88 global acres of land, sea, and air to sustain my lifestyle. Breaking it down, I found out that I take up 47.6 acres with my carbon footprint, 65.7 acres with my food footprint, 37.2 acres with my housing footprint, and 27.3 acres with my goods and services footprint.

Now that my footprint is somewhat dissected, I can see the areas that I will be able to improve on right away. This quarter, I will work achieve three different goals/lifestyle changes in order to reduce my footprint and also live a healthier and less dependent lifestyle.

• First, I will get started on cutting down my food footprint. It was the largest of the four categories, consuming 65.7 global acres. First will limit myself to eating out only once a week. Instead I will cook meals at home, hopefully buying foods that are local and organic. It would be pretty hard to live on only organics with my already low college budget, but I will try my hardest to shop smart. This means more whole foods, less packaging, and less meat.
• Second, I will work on my goods and services footprint, which currently takes up 27.3 acres. I will keep on recycling like I have been, but now I will start composting! My neighbor already has a compost bin and is more than happy for our house to fill it up.
• Third, I will reduce my housing footprint. At 37.2 acres, this footprint is already above the national average of 31.6 acres. Composting will help this footprint as well, but I will also cut down on my water consumption by only showering once a week! Just kidding.. I will still shower daily but cut down my showers to five minutes. I will also only turn on my faucets half way when rinsing off dishes to use much less water. I will save water as many ways as I can.

I already know that achieving all of these goals will be harder for me as I am living with seven other roommates. I will do my best and hopefully show them that this change will be good for all of us. I know that some of the things that we work on will directly cut down on our utility bills and make us happier and healthier people in the long run. Time to stomp my footprint!