>Apologies for cross posting. NNTBSP, Ed.
Very interesting study, thanks. More about it here: http://www.rprogress.org/programs/sustainability/ef/pnas_0602.html Redefining Progress: Programs: Sustainability: Ecological Footprint Accounts: PNAS Article June 2002 >------ Forwarded Message >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 20:06:03 +0000 >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Earth Can't Meet Human Demand for Resources, Says Study > >Earth can't meet human demand for resources, says study Well, all us eggs may be in the same basket, but some of them eggs are dogs in the manger in eggs' clothing. (Mix metaphors? Me?) This is the bit that matters: >For example, Wackernagel and his team found that in 1999, each person >consumed an average of 5.7 acres. The global average was significantly lower >than industrialized countries such as the United States and the United >Kingdom, where 24 acres and 13.3 acres, respectively, were consumed per >person. The US being twice as greedy as all the other greedy ones, as usual. Same with energy use, same with CO2 emissions, same with waste, same with everything. How many of those 24 acres are actually in the US? Not very many, the damage is caused elsewhere, at other people's expense. There are 59.6 million Brits, each accounting for 13.3 acres, which comes to a total area of 3,210,445 sq km, 13.1 times the area of Britain. So the Brits have room for a footprint of 1 acre each, the other 12 acres are in other people's countries. There are 278 million Americans, accounting for 24 acres each, which comes to a total area of 27,006,435 sq km, 2.8 times the area of the US. There's room in the US for each American to have a footprint of 8.6 acres, but that means they'd have to use the mountains, deserts, lakes, everything. Even if they were doing that, which they're not, and can't, they'd still be using 15 acres each of other people's land. Actually it's a lot more than that. So let's narrow it down a bit. Read: "Industrialized countries, and especially their cities..." Thor Skov's excellent post today on "global warming b.s. etc.etc." is most pertinent. These people talk of "mumbo-jumbo science" being used as an excuse to demand forced redistribution of wealth and a "wholesale restructuring of the socio-political order", of envy and covetousness, of resentment of others' economic advantages. Thus speak the robbers and those who benefit from the robbery. Waste junkies, while others starve to death because of it. "Guilt manipulation"? Damned right!! > "If we don't live within the budget > of nature, sustainability becomes futile," Wackernagel said. The current inequitable economic system is clearly unsustainable, for everyone, rich and poor alike, but particularly for the victims. Keith ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Free $5 Love Reading Risk Free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/3PCXaC/PfREAA/Ey.GAA/9bTolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://www.webconx.com/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
