Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (20)
Destacado
Similar a Ecological foot prints
Similar a Ecological foot prints (20)
Último
Último (20)
Ecological foot prints
- 2. Ecological Footprints Intro: The climate changes along with the degradation of the environment is mainly due to the over usage of natural resources. Certain strategies and methodology of accounting the ongoing depletion has been formulated. The concept of Ecological Footprints is a such a strategy which is used to manage the natural reserves while reducing the nation’s demand on ecosystem services. Definition: The amount of productive land and water a given population requires to produce all the resources they consume and take in all the waste they make using prevailing technology (Onisto et al. 1998) From a school perspective : EF = The space required to support all the inputs and outputs of the school body. “Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed” Mahatma Gandhi
- 3. Ecological Footprints Sustainability Model We can calculate how much biological productive area we have. We can calculate how much we are using. Living sustainable means that we are not living beyond what is available. To achieve a sustainable growth pattern we generally look at the “supply side” of the equation. Such measurements put the whole onus for sustainable development on the producer. The “ecological footprint” looks at the “demand” side of the equation and places responsibility for sustainable development not only on the producer but on the consumer.
- 5. Ecological Footprints The six human activities that require space are: Cropland Grazing Land Forest for Timber & Fuel Wood Fishing Ground Forest for Carbon Sequestration Global hectare of demand represents a particular use that excludes any other use tracked by the Footprint. In other words, it represents the aggregate demand or Ecological Footprint. The Hectares of demand is the area of biologically productive land and water pertaining to each of the factors.
- 10. Japan – 4.8 ha/capita
- 11. Zimbabwe – 1.3 ha/capita
- 12. India – 0.8 ha/capita
- 13. Bangladesh – 0.5 ha/capitaThe Global ecological footprints -17.1 billion global hectares in 2006 or 2.6 global hectares per person The productive area of the biosphere translates into 11.2 billion hectares on an average of 1.8 global hectares per person in2003. Ecological Footprints
- 15. The height of each box is proportional to the region's average ecological footprint per person; and
- 16. The width of the box is proportional to the population of the region.(The OECD and non-OECD columns refer only to average ecological footprint per person).
- 18. The Ecological Footprint and biocapacity (per capita) of three countries from 1961-2005. A country runs an if its Footprint exceeds what its ecosystems can renew. The deficit is made up through net-imports, net-carbon emissions to the global atmosphere, or local resource degradation
- 19. Shrinking Ecological Credit Biocapacity Increasing Ecological and Social Instability Ecological Footprint
- 20. Ecological Footprints The 2008 Edition of the National Footprint Accounts calculates the Ecological Footprint and bio capacity for 201 countries, from 1961 to 2005. The Ecological Footprint is calculated by the following equation: Ecological Footprint = (annual demand in tonnes / national yield in annual tonnes per ha) x Yield Factor x Equivalence Factor. In this very regard the concept of Biocapacity Assessment comes into use. Biocapacity is an aggregated measure of the amount of land available, weighted by the productivity of that land. It represents the ability of the biosphere to produce crops, livestock (pasture), timber products (forest) and fish, as well as to sequester waste such as CO2. Biocapacity = Area x Yield Factor x Equivalence Factor Calculation Methodology
- 21. Ecological Footprints J Fig: In 2003 Humanity’s total or global ecological footprints was about 25% higher than the earth’s ecological capacity and is projected to be twice the planets capacity by end of 2050. Comparativestudy of per capita and Total Ecological Footprints
- 22. Ecological Footprints The Carbon Footprints is calculated for the Forest for Carbon Sequestration component as the amount of forest land required to absorb given carbon emissions. The calculation goes on like: Step 1: Add the atmospheric emissions of CO2 from burning fossil fuels, land-use change (deforestation, for example), and emissions from the international transport of passengers and freight. Step 2: After subtracting the amount of CO2 sequestered in the world’s oceans each year from the anthropogenic total, the remaining CO2 is translated into the amount of bioproductive forest that would be needed to store it that year.
- 23. Ecological Creditors & Ecological Debtors
- 24. Ecological Creditors & Ecological Debtors
- 26. Ways to reduce EF Save on energy usage Use less gas Recycle more Buy eco friendly products
- 28. Any process, activity or mechanism which removes a greenhouse gas, an aerosol or a precursor of a greenhouse gas from the atmosphere.
- 29. Oceans, soils and forests all offer some potential to be managed as a sink.
- 30. Sources:
- 31. Burning of Coal, oil and natural gases
- 33. Raising of cattle and planting rice
- 35. Limitations of the EcologicalFootprint Method What the Footprint does not measure well Waste flows Freshwater use Nuclear power Aspects of demand for which data are sparse
- 36. There are two options for calculating your footprint. Choose one of the following: http://www.wastedtv.co.nz/index.cfm?&action=calculator http://www.earthday.net/footprint/index.html http://www.myfootprint.org/en/
Notas del editor
- - As consumers we have a responsibility - why are we throwing out so much food in the first place, are we making an effort to reduce our energy consumption, do we eat a diet suitable to our nutritional needs and level of activity. Our footprint directly relates to our lifestyle and the choices that we make.
- Depleting resources faster than they can regenerate and producing more waste than the world can handle. If all the world's people were to consume at Nova Scotian levels, we would need four additional planets earth to provide the necessary resources and waste assimilation capacity.India stands at a disadvantageous position. With a per person Footprint of 0.75 global hectares and per person biocapacity of 0.4 global hectares, India is running an ecological deficit of approximately 100 percent. India’s growing ecological debt is the result ofboth increasing population and increasing per capita consumption of resources, particularly of non-renewable energy. By 2020 if India has to emerge as a super power, it would require a boost in the industrial progression. However it will cause depletion of the natural resources and hence take the nation to a serious setback in the terms of the Gross Domestic Product. Hence sustainable development has to be maintained to avoid getting into such a vicious cycle.
- Why Equador?
- Non-ecological aspects of sustainability.{ Having a Footprint smaller than global biocapacity is a necessary minimum condition for humanity’s sustainability, but is not sufficient. For instance, social well-being also needs to be tracked, but this is not measured by the Footprint. The Ecological Footprint also makes no attempt to evaluate the long-term viability of social structures, economies, or political systems.}Depletion of non-renewable resources. The Footprint does not track the amount or the depletion of non-renewable resource stocks, such as oil, natural gas, coal or metal deposits.Inherently unsustainable activities. Activities that are inherently unsustainable, such as the release of heavy metals, radioactive materials and persistent synthetic compounds (chlordane, PCBs, CFCs, PVCs, dioxins, etc.), which nature cannot break down, do not enter into Footprint calculations.Ecological degradation. The Footprint does not directly measure ecological degradation, such as increased soil salinity from irrigation, that could affect future productivity.Resilience of ecosystems. Excessive disturbance, leading to collapse, does not mean extermination of life, but rather a shift of the ecosystem into a qualitatively different state, with a new species composition.