How many Earths would we need if everyone lived like you?

[Flerbizky]

2.1 here too.

Anyone know where we can get another Earth from?

I have one at eBay at the moment.. Also listed is an Eiffel Tower if anyones interested...

I hit 3.4, and may have been a little on the radical side of things....

 

[Diablomonkey]

 

[CDailey]

I see someone else reads digg.

 

[jammyozzy]

Better than some I guess, but it's still kinda worrying. 200+ km on a coach into school every week seems to do wonders for my score.

 

[SRV2LOW4ME]

Food 4

Mobility 0

Shelter 3.6

Goods/services 3.7

Total Footprint 11.3

In Comparison, The Average Ecological Footprint In Your Country Is 8.8 Global Hectares Per Person.

Worldwide, There Exist 1.8 Biologically Productive Global Hectares Per Person.

If Everyone Lived Like You, We Would Need 6.3 Planets

 

[G.T]

Worst so far. I love how my shelter scores so low.


FOOD 1.3
MOBILITY 0.1
SHELTER 0.4
GOODS/SERVICES 0.4
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 2.2

 

[CDailey]

Category Acres
Food 5.4
Mobility 1
Shelter 8.4
Goods/services 6.4
Total Footprint 21



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 4.8 Planets.

 

[Barracuda]

I would need 5.9 planets. Im the kinda guy that lives for today and doesn't really care about what im doing to affect the "future". Will i be alive in 100 years, most likely not and my kids and grandkids will just have to suck it up and live with it.

Im tired of all these laws about cars in the U.S that won't let you have a decently powered car because "Global warming, omg the world is going to end". ( luckily I live in Florida (not by my own will) so there is no inspection. No exhaust, No problem. ) but Real car enthusiasts that live in the more strict places ( California and such ) will definitely agree with me.

Its a mean logic but i'm a mean person

 

[Kylehnat]

2.1, but I'd love to know where they get their info on how much "x" costs in "global acres".

I would, too. Also, the extrapolation is ridiculous. If you "fudge" numbers just a tiny bit (they wouldn't do that, would they?), and then multiply it by 6,000,000,000, it introduces huge errors into your result.

 

[standard235]

Category Acres
Food 4.2
Mobility 28.9
Shelter 5.4
Goods/services 39
Total Footprint 78



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 17.4 Planets.

 

[V1P3R]

A little surprised...

 

[Car-less]

Why do I feel eco-friendly?

Category: Hectares
Food: 1.3
Mobility: 0.1
Shelter: 1
Goods/Services: 0.8
Total: 3.2

Average in my country: 5.3
If everyone lived like me, we would need 1.8 planets.

So if there is only so much productive land on this planet,
and my standard of living requires ~2 planets when extrapolated to the whole population...
then all we need do is halve the population of this planet.

</inhumane thoughts>

 

[Danoff]

If everyone lived like me, we would need 1.8 planets.

So if there is only so much productive land on this planet,
and my standard of living requires ~2 planets when extrapolated to the whole population...
then all we need do is halve the population of this planet.

</inhumane thoughts>

...or double our production and efficiency with non-renewable resources.

 

[Seanman]

Oh geez...

 

[Car-less]

...or double our production and efficiency with non-renewable resources.

Note how my worst category was food.
So we have to double our productivity by growing Huge vegetables that taste of styrofoam, or cram twice as many chickens in each factory farm?

Mobility was my best score - not owning a car helped tremendously, but I do have to travel occasionally. I'm feeling greener already.

 

[Danoff]

So we have to double our productivity by growing Huge vegetables that taste of styrofoam, or cram twice as many chickens in each factory farm?

That assumes that we can't grow food in any new areas or build any new chicken farms. The basic claim here is that if everyone ate as much as you did, we'd need to boost our food production by 100%.

Basically, to do that the nations that haven't figured out how to feed their populations need to figure it out. People are starving in Africa, North Korea, and elsewhere. It's not because it's impossible to grow/raise food there. It's because their governments and economies aren't letting it happen. Fix that problem, and the food starts flowing. Then maybe they'll start eating as much as you do, and suddenly we don't need a second planet because they're making food that our planet wasn't producing before.

 

[dylansan]

What weird is that it is very hard to get the quiz to show less than 4.5 acres, so wouldn't that mean that we should need more than one Earth, and yet we obviously don't? I mean come on, how many people live with 6 others in a 500square foot home? Maybe a few, but not that many...

 

[land sea air]

3.9 planets for me please, I enjoy driving but I use the metro a lot for work so I guess that kinda evens it out.
EDIT: @ minicooper, I'm sure there are plenty of people out there (Africa comes to mind) who would score less than 1 earth if they took the quiz, I'm sure most of them don't have access to a computer or even electricity for that matter

 

[TopHat]

I've done this before, I think mine was 3.5 or something rediculous.

 

[Car-less]

People are starving in Africa, North Korea, and elsewhere. It's not because it's impossible to grow/raise food there. It's because their governments and economies aren't letting it happen. Fix that problem, and the food starts flowing.

I should have known better than to question a debater!

I was ready with a comeback suggesting we need only figure out how to make the Sahara as productive and biodiverse as the Amazon, but then you throw in Governments and Economics.

I totally agree with the bit quoted above, but am also still firmly of the opinion that the planet is NOT capable of sustaining its current population to a western standard of living.

 

[Philly]

4.9.

Somehow, I think US and Canada results are going to be much higher than Europe. Just an idea...

 

[YSSMAN]

FOOD 5.4
MOBILITY 2
SHELTER 6.4
GOODS/SERVICES 5.7
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 20

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 4.4 PLANETS.

We all seem to be on the same page for the most part, some lower than others, which I assume is because of their location on the "Erff." Hmmm. I wonder why my mobility is so low, but everything else is so high. I mean, I do still live at home with my Mother and my Brother, but we don't eat that much, and even then, a lot of it is locally (in-state) grown...

 

[McLaren]

Category Acres
Food 5.7
Mobility 4
Shelter 4.7
Goods/services 7.9
Total Footprint 22

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 Planets.

 

[GT Pro]

I don't know how this all works out, all I know is that I often walk to school, don't drive much, have a big house and don't eat much food.

 

[Keef]

I would require 5.8 Earths, and my footprint is 26 acres. Hey, I'm American. Sue me.

 

[Touring Mars]

3.8 for me... luckily not everyone lives like us Londoners.

Funnily enough, I have never owned a car and I have walked to work everyday for the last 8 years, I have lived in a shared house for even longer (surely that's more environmentally friendly than living in a single occupancy place?) and I still need 2.8 more planets than I've got... all I can say is, wow...

I'm more concerned about resource management than the abundance of actual resources... take fresh water for example... the whole world is heading for a critical shortage of fresh water apparently, and yet the amount of fresh water the Amazon river alone pumps into the Atlantic Ocean equates to 1 litre of fresh water for every human being on Earth every 20 seconds...

 

[MagpieRacer]

Category Global Hectares
Food 1.5
Mobility 0
Shelter 0.4
Goods/services 0.3
Total Footprint 2.2



In Comparison, The Average Ecological Footprint In Your Country Is 5.3 Global Hectares Per Person.

Worldwide, There Exist 1.8 Biologically Productive Global Hectares Per Person.

IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.2 PLANETS.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

If everyone was like me, it'd take 3 & 1/2 Earths and if everyone was like me life would be perfect.

 

[Mark T]

Category Global Hectares

Food 1.5

Mobility 0.5

Shelter 1.1

Goods/Services 0.9

Total Footprint 4

In comparison, the average ecological footprint in your country is 5.3 global hectares per person.

Worldwide, there exist1.8 biologically productive global hectares per person.

If everyone lived like you, we would need 2.2 planets.

 

[TheCracker]

3.5 planets for me. However, i have no idea how many square feet my house is or how many Km per litre my car does.