|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 22, 2016 23:04:02 GMT
Topic 3 : Human Footprint - Discover the impact of your choice.
Did you know that during the course of your lifetime you will eat about 12,000 oranges? These oranges will travel a total of about 23 million miles to reach your fruit bowl or glass of OJ. Shipping fruit takes energy. Energy comes from fuel. Everything that you eat (bread), use (newspapers), and do (take showers) has an impact on the world. This impact is called your human footprint. While there's no need to swear off oranges, and, please, don't stop bathing, this interactive will help you learn about how you live and the impact it will have over your lifetime.
Review the interactive Human Footprint game created by the National Geographic Society. Discuss your current lifetime impact. How do you compare to the average of other countries? What impact and/or relevance do the identified facts present? Of what benefit is this type of interactive game?
nationalgeographic.org/interactive/human-footprint-interactive/
Please note that this interactive presentation is US based, and therefore measures are in imperial and not metric. 1 pound equals 0.453 kilograms, 1 mile = 1.6 kilometres or 1609 metres.
Support your arguments with cited supporting evidence.
|
|
|
|
Post by margaret on Sept 29, 2016 11:27:40 GMT
Ever heard of "Earth Overshoot Day"? It marks the point in the year where we use up the equivalent of what we can sustainably use for the whole year: in other words, every day after that we are using up resources we can't afford. This year it was calculated to fall on August 8th. So what we are all using now, all day every day, is more than what should have been our limit for the whole year. We're using our resources faster and faster:
In the 1960s, for example, we managed to stretch three quarters of our year’s allocated “supply” across the whole 365-day period, giving us an
“energy surplus” of about three months.
By 1987, we’d “run out” by mid-December. Not too bad.
By 2007, we’d “run out” by the end of October. That was a little more concerning.
As of today — August 9 [2016] — we’re officially in “credit mode”. It’s the earliest time in the year that’s ever happened.1This is from a news report based on information from the organisation Global Footprint Network ( www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/ ). So according to GFN in 2007 our "overshoot day" was six weeks earlier than in 1987. That means we had consumed our sustainable annual resources so much faster that they lasted ten months instead of 11½. But in 2016 it was nearly twelve weeks earlier than in 2007, eighteen weeks earlier than in 1987. Supposedly our awareness of environmental issues has grown in this time - and yet so has our rate of using up non-renewable resources. If we continue to increase our consumption at that rate - i.e. if we increase as fast as 2007-2016, not at a faster rate - we will by 2025 be using a year's resources in less than half the year.
1. www.news.com.au/technology/environment/conservation/its-official-were-wasting-our-natural-resources-faster-than-ever-before/news-story/45a09beaf49773c8f515a68209f509d8Accessed 29 September 2016. |
|
|
|
Post by abdult14armata on Sept 30, 2016 2:45:08 GMT
In United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland the average potato eaten for one lifetime is nearly 59,000 because their like fish and chips it's the place of origin and it's popular in UK. My own average potato eaten for one lifetime is 32,344 for my potato I need two trucks for my potato, for one truck is 4.5 ton and for my potato 200 litres of water a week.
|
|
|
|
Post by margaret on Oct 3, 2016 1:12:23 GMT
When thinking about your environmental footprint, you might consider your phone use. Your phone impacts the environment at each stage of its fairly short life: the mining of materials used to produce it, the manufacture and then transport of the phone, the power involved in maintaining the network as well as in using and charging the phone, and finally and perhaps most seriously, the disposal of phones, which are often discarded as soon as a new model is available. Here's a good overview in a clear visual format: visual.ly/environmental-impact-cell-phonesSome surprising details about mining the materials to manufacture phones: First, raw materials must be extracted from the earth and processed before they go to factories where the phones are constructed. This task depletes natural resources like crude oil, copper, gold, palladium, and silicon. It also requires considerable amounts of energy and water, and generates pollution and waste. Consider just one example—it is estimated that over 220 pounds of mine waste is generated to extract the gold for a circuit board of just one cell phone.1 [My emphasis] But it gets worse. Manufacturing phones is considered the phase which has the greatest impact on the environment. You can read about that here: www.greeniacs.com/GreeniacsArticles/Consumer-Products/Cell-Phones-and-the-Environment.htmlAlthough phone use in itself is not the most damaging phase of the phone's life, it is after all the reason for the mining and manufacture. The overall impact of devices is expected to get worse: The Global Footprint of Mobile Communications report by Ericsson estimates that while the overall carbon footprint of all information and communication technology will almost double between 2007 and 2020, “the footprint of mobile communications might almost triple within the same period, reaching more than one third of the present annual emissions of the entire United Kingdom.” 2One of the biggest concerns is the rapid turnover of phones - partly because of the environmental impact of producing something that is used for only a year or two, but also because of the damage caused when phones are discarded. Here are some sites which look at the impact of throwing away old phones: www.cleanup.org.au/PDF/au/cleanupaustralia_mobilephone_factsheet.pdfwww.greeniacs.com/GreeniacsArticles/Consumer-Products/Cell-Phones-and-the-Environment.htmlAnd some more which examine electrical waste in general, not focusing on phones in particular: www.theguardian.com/global-development/2013/dec/14/toxic-ewaste-illegal-dumping-developing-countrieswww.theguardian.com/environment/2015/apr/19/worlds-mountain-of-electrical-waste-reaches-new-peak-of-42m-tonnesNo-one is likely to suggest we give up our phones. But what can we do to reduce the damage they are doing?
1 www.greeniacs.com/GreeniacsArticles/Consumer-Products/Cell-Phones-and-the-Environment.html Accessed 2 October 2016 2 www.gsma.com/publicpolicy/global-carbon-footprint-of-mobile-phone-communication-to-triple-by-2020 Accessed 2 October 2016 |
|
|
|
Post by margaret on Oct 5, 2016 1:57:03 GMT
Here's an article from The Guardian 20 September 2016 about re-using items to minimise electrical and other waste. It's from the British edition of The Guardian and has referred to the Swedish tax "MOMS" as its British equivalent "VAT" - both are similar to our GST, although higher rates than ours. Waste not want not: Sweden to give tax breaks for repairs
Government to tackle ‘throwaway culture’ by cutting VAT on fixing everything from bicycles to washing machines
The Swedish government is introducing tax breaks on repairs to everything from bicycles to washing machines so it will no longer make sense to throw out old or broken items and buy new ones.
Sweden's ruling Social Democrat and Green party coalition is set to submit proposals to parliament on Tuesday to slash the VAT rate on repairs to bicycles, clothes and shoes from 25% to 12%.
It will also submit a proposal that would allow people to claim back from income tax half of the labour cost on repairs to appliances such as fridges, ovens, dishwashers and washing machines.
“We believe that this could substantially lower the cost and so make it more rational economic behaviour to repair your goods,” said Per Bolund, Sweden’s minister for financial markets and consumer affairs and one of six Green party cabinet members.
Bolund has been a key figure in driving through the new incentives. He estimates that the VAT cut will reduce the cost of a repair worth 400 SEK (£36) by about 50 SEK, enough to stimulate the repair industry in Sweden.
He hopes the tax break on appliances will spur the creation of a new home-repairs service industry, providing much-needed jobs for new immigrants who lack formal education.
The incentives are part of a shift in government focus from reducing carbon emissions produced domestically to reducing emissions tied to goods produced elsewhere.
Sweden has cut its annual emissions of carbon dioxide by 23% since 1990 and already generates more than half of its electricity from renewable sources.
But emissions linked to consumption have stubbornly risen. Bolund said the policy also tied in with international trends around reduced consumption and crafts, such as the “maker movement” and the sharing economy, both of which have strong followings in Sweden.
“I believe there is a shift in view in Sweden at the moment. There is an increased knowledge that we need to make our things last longer in order to reduce materials’ consumption,” he said.
The proposals will be presented in parliament as part of the government’s budget proposals and if voted through in December will become law from 1 January 2017.
- www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/19/waste-not-want-not-sweden-tax-breaks-repairs
Accessed 2 October 2016
|
|
|
|
Post by margaret on Oct 5, 2016 2:05:53 GMT
I seem to be talking to myself here but in case anyone is listening here's a link to a site with very clear fact sheets on several aspects of our environmental footprints, and ways to reduce them: www.cleanup.org.au/au/Factsheets/ |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 6, 2016 10:51:11 GMT
I seem to be talking to myself here but in case anyone is listening here's a link to a site with very clear fact sheets on several aspects of our environmental footprints, and ways to reduce them: www.cleanup.org.au/au/Factsheets/Hi Margaret,
Looks like you have been having some great conversations on ProBoard. Thank you for sharing the factsheets on our environmental footprints. I was particularly interested in the 'Avoiding Waste' section and looking into 'illegal dumping'.
Illegal dumping is an environmental crime that can cause serious environmental pollution, pose a risk to human health, and impact local amenities and community pride.1 Reviewing the factsheet raised some particular interest as there was reference to multiple states and their strategic approach to managing such a huge environmental issue; however there was no reference to the Northern Territory at all.
Does this mean that Northern Territorians do not have an environmental footprint in relation to illegal dumping? Annually we have Cyclone Clean-Up which provides all residents with the opportunity to not only clear their yards of possible projectiles (flying objects) in a cyclone, but also provides them with the opportunity of clearing out any unwanted large items. This is quite obvious when driving through suburbs at this time of the year seeing couches, televisions, washing machines and the like.
In addition to this, all residents of the NT have free access to local council dump areas. I noticed a few years ago in Victoria, when I needed to clean out my parents house, that there were expensive charges to take unwanted items to the council dump. As I did not have a vehicle, this was not an option so I hired a skip bin. The next part of this story (a real one) is interesting ... I was warned by my parents neighbours to make sure that I filled the skip bin to full capacity, otherwise others in the area would over night. I worked extremely hard that day to ensure that I placed everything in the skip bin, and it was definitely full. Next morning, yes there was MORE in the skip bin as well as a lot of missing items that I had put in the previous day. Perhaps some recycling of household items. The point that I am trying to make, is that in other states the restriction to free rubbish disposal can have a detrimental impact on the environment as there is no cost to dump the item on the side of the road; unless you get caught. So should councils in other states/territories review their current charges for the disposal of household items by residents? Would this have a significant impact on the quantity of illegally dump items?
* It is estimated that more than 11,000 tonnes of waste are illegally dumped each year in Western Sydney alone.2 * Illegal dumping represented the largest contribution to estimated litter volume per 1,000m2 in South Australia and Victoria during 2012/13.5. 3 * NSW councils spend around $10 million each year responding to illegal dumping and illegal landfilling. 4
Imagine what the NSW councils could do for the environment with $10 million dollars annually, rather than cleaning up someone's unwanted and illegally dump rubbish.
Whilst the initial factsheet did not make reference to the Northern Territory, the NT Environmental Protection Agency (NT EPA) has a factsheet on illegal dumping. In which it reiterates (reinforces) that combating illegal dumping it one of its key priorities within the Northern Territory (urban and rural communities). The NT EPA factsheet focuses more on raising awareness of the growing issue of illegal dumping and how to address it when it is discovered. They define illegal dumping as illegal dumping may vary from small bags of rubbish or household waste in an urban environment to larger scale dumping of materials such as construction and demolition waste in more isolated areas. Waste may include dangerous materials like asbestos. Illegal dumping also involves the dumping of liquid waste to land and to waterways.5
The NT EPA factsheet is very informative, however lengthy as well. The photographs included in the factsheet are very dramatic and definitely made an impact on me as to the quantity of rubbish being dumped in OUR native bushlands. This can only have a negative impact on the ecosystem and wildlife in the area for the long term. A topic for some of you to possibly consider for your Field Research on Nightcliff Foreshore.
References 1 ntepa.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/285740/factsheet_illegal_dumping_what_you_need_know.pdf [Online] Accessed 6 October 2016 2 www.cleanup.org.au/files/clean_up_australia_illegal_dumping_factsheet.pdf [Online] Accessed 6 October 2016 3 ibid (details as per previous reference) 4 ibid 5 ntepa.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/285740/factsheet_illegal_dumping_what_you_need_know.pdf [Online] Accessed 6 October 2016
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 6, 2016 11:11:01 GMT
In United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland the average potato eaten for one lifetime is nearly 59,000 because their like fish and chips it's the place of origin and it's popular in UK. My own average potato eaten for one lifetime is 32,344 for my potato I need two trucks for my potato, for one truck is 4.5 ton and for my potato 200 litres of water a week. Abdul, that is a great deal of potatoes that they eat in a lifetime in the United Kingdom, however as you have stated potatoes are a big part of the staple diet in this country; even to the point that they have chips with their Chinese meals in Northern Ireland.
Whilst your lifetime usage is less than half of the United Kingdom, 200 litres of water a week is a lot of water. I am sure that you are not the only one that consumes this quantity of potatoes in the group; however 200 litres of water in a week for the potato consumption equates to:
Full bath (140 litres) : 1.4 baths per week Single Toilet Flush (12 litres) : 16.6 visits to the bathroom (remember there are only 7 days in the week) Modern Front Loader Washing Machine (60 litres) : 3.3 loads of washing Brushing Teeth (with tap off) (1 litre per minute) : 200 brushes
These conversions were taken from the Yarra Valley Water website.1
So for your 32,344 lifetime potato intake, what is your human footprint? Perhaps refer back to our ProBoard discussions on Water Conservation for some ideas.
Reference 1 www.yvw.com.au/Home/Inyourhome/Understandingyourwateruse/index.htm [Online] Accessed 6 October 2016
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 6, 2016 11:28:59 GMT
Topic 3 : Human Footprint - Discover the impact of your choice.
Did you know that during the course of your lifetime you will eat about 12,000 oranges? These oranges will travel a total of about 23 million miles to reach your fruit bowl or glass of OJ. Shipping fruit takes energy. Energy comes from fuel. Everything that you eat (bread), use (newspapers), and do (take showers) has an impact on the world. This impact is called your human footprint. While there's no need to swear off oranges, and, please, don't stop bathing, this interactive will help you learn about how you live and the impact it will have over your lifetime.
Review the interactive Human Footprint game created by the National Geographic Society. Discuss your current lifetime impact. How do you compare to the average of other countries? What impact and/or relevance do the identified facts present? Of what benefit is this type of interactive game?
nationalgeographic.org/interactive/human-footprint-interactive/
Please note that this interactive presentation is US based, and therefore measures are in imperial and not metric. 1 pound equals 0.453 kilograms, 1 mile = 1.6 kilometres or 1609 metres.
Support your arguments with cited supporting evidence. Whilst we have become aware of some discrepancies (inconsistencies/differences) in the usage of the National Geographic interactive, such as the capacity to process high volumes and the differences in metric and imperial measurements, I think essentially the interactive tool is beneficial in raising awareness of our human footprint in our general daily lives.
Essentially for children/youth, who are the next generation in addressing such environmental concerns, it assists in raising a general awareness of the impact we have on the environment in which we live. Whilst we need to eat food and travel for school, work, sport and social events it provides an awareness that we should be considering alternative options.
The travel option is easy to consider. Can you walk, ride a bike, catch a bus or share travel with someone else?
The food option is more difficult as we all need to eat. However, what we eat, how it is prepared and where it comes from can influence the level of our human footprint. For our Topic 5 discussions we will investigate into Food Miles, so this will provide further insight (information) into the food option.
|
|
|
|
Post by margaret on Oct 8, 2016 6:39:24 GMT
One specifically NT aspect you might consider is the Cash for Containers scheme - I know SA has a similar system of a refundable deposit on certain cans and bottles, but it is not in place in most of the country. In Victoria since 2009 there has been a (so far unsuccessful) move to introduce container deposits and the NT scheme has been cited as an example to follow 1. But when I moved here it seemed to me there were as many discarded cans and bottles as anywhere else. It would be interesting to find out how successful this scheme really is. Perhaps people who would have disposed of their containers thoughtfully anyway now return them to claim their deposits, but people who formerly just discarded containers on the beach or by the road, still do so. Has the scheme made a difference and is it worth introducing interstate?
1 www.parliament.vic.gov.au/images/stories/documents/council/SCEP/CDL/Documents/Discussion_Paper.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by chandler on Oct 12, 2016 12:17:42 GMT
The interactive created by the National Geographic Society has roughly calculated the total amount of miles that I travel in my lifetime. Since I travel about 17.7 km from my home to the school every weekdays, my total (lifetime) was 247,926 miles (398,998.2km). The car that we use is a Toyota corolla sedan and it consumes 6.6L/100km, now if I multiply 6.6 by 398998.2 I will get the total liters used in my lifetime, which is 2633388.1L. Multiply it by the unleaded price (2633388.1 x 1.09) it equals $2870393.03.
|
|
|
|
Post by samlol16 on Oct 14, 2016 2:30:46 GMT
Everything we do makes demands on nature and the environment. The morning coffee we all have, the clothes we buy and put on our backs, what we eat, the way we travel form walking to riding and form cars to planes, everything we do has an impact on the environment. When combined with the demands of every other person on our Earth – commonly known as humanity's Ecological Footprint – we are far exceeding this planet's capabilities of the producing of natural resources to keep-up with our demand. We are currently needing 1.5 planet Earths to sustain our global needs and resource demand. But we've only got one, sadly. = ( This over-consumption of natural resources and the pollution that we make means that our soil and waterways are being degraded, habitats are being destroyed, we're putting pressure on our most vulnerable communities and the Earth is warming. But it's not irreparable. We can help to restore the balance in nature if we each make some simple changes. The time it takes the Earth to make a piece of coal is over millions of years. Like all natural resources it takes millions of years to make. www.wwf.org.au/get-involved/change-the-way-you-live/ecological-footprint-calculator |
|
|
|
Post by margaret on Oct 16, 2016 1:57:27 GMT
The interactive created by the National Geographic Society has roughly calculated the total amount of miles that I travel in my lifetime. Since I travel about 17.7 km from my home to the school every weekdays, my total (lifetime) was 247,926 miles (398,998.2km). The car that we use is a Toyota corolla sedan and it consumes 6.6L/100km, now if I multiply 6.6 by 398998.2 I will get the total liters used in my lifetime, which is 2633388.1L. Multiply it by the unleaded price (2633388.1 x 1.09) it equals $2870393.03. Good that you've done this calculation, chandler. But I think you need to reposition your decimal point - you have found out that your car uses 6.6L per 100km but you have multiplied your total kms by 6.6. You need to divide your total by 100 and then use your formula to calculate the petrol you will use. |
|
max
New Member
Posts: 12 
|
Post by max on Oct 21, 2016 2:08:52 GMT
One specifically NT aspect you might consider is the Cash for Containers scheme - I know SA has a similar system of a refundable deposit on certain cans and bottles, but it is not in place in most of the country. In Victoria since 2009 there has been a (so far unsuccessful) move to introduce container deposits and the NT scheme has been cited as an example to follow 1. But when I moved here it seemed to me there were as many discarded cans and bottles as anywhere else. It would be interesting to find out how successful this scheme really is. Perhaps people who would have disposed of their containers thoughtfully anyway now return them to claim their deposits, but people who formerly just discarded containers on the beach or by the road, still do so. Has the scheme made a difference and is it worth introducing interstate?
1 www.parliament.vic.gov.au/images/stories/documents/council/SCEP/CDL/Documents/Discussion_Paper.pdf I agree with you and that we should be putting machines that refund the money on the spot around in more areas. I know that when the humpty doo dump opened there was a machine there that would refund you 10c if you put a recyclable container in it. |
|
|
|
Post by margaret on Oct 22, 2016 6:21:23 GMT
max In Sweden they have had refund machines in pretty much every supermarket since the 1970s. You can return containers and get a credit docket to use in the supermarket or take the refund as cash:  www.osp.nu/sveriges-snabbaste-pantmaskin/ Accessed 22 Oct 2016
|
|
