Just how big is your carbon footprint?
By Roger Fillion, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published February 18, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.
Ever wonder just how much you're contributing to global warming when you drive to work or crank up the thermostat a notch or two on a cold day?
How many tons of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases do you spew into the atmosphere when you drive, fly, eat and lead your life at home? How much do you save by recycling or composting?
The Internet stands ready to help calculate your so-called "carbon footprint" with a number of Web sites dedicated to the task.
Lisa Dilling, assistant professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado, said the sites are "worthwhile" - even if there is what she calls a "black box" quality about them. It's not crystal clear how they work.
Dilling likens the calculators to weight loss.
"If you're trying to lose weight, you like to step on the scale and see what you weigh," she says.
Outfits ranging from the Environmental Protection Agency to Yahoo operate the sites.
They offer tips on how to reduce your footprint - from turning down the thermostat in the winter to asking the hotel staff to wash your towels every other day rather than every day.
And they'll let you "offset" your footprint by contributing money to fund a wind farm, for example, or plant trees.
The calculators vary, both in how they do the math and their level of sophistication. Some may require you to refer to your monthly utility bill. Others don't.
Curious about how exactly the process worked, we logged on to the Nature Conservancy site. There, we created three families: energy hogs, misers and average users.
It would be fair to say that our energy gluttons - a family of four - were pretty oblivious when it came to conserving energy and cutting their carbon footprint. Lights on all the time. Big TVs. Thermostat turned high. Gas-guzzling SUVs.
Our second family was the polar opposite. They bike. Drive a hybrid. Recycle like crazy. Use energy-efficient light bulbs.
Our third family, a couple, is closer to the U.S. "average." They've installed some compact fluorescent light bulbs at home and occasionally check the air filter and tire pressure on their cars. They sometimes eat organics and recycle.
Regardless of the calculation method, though, one thing is clear: Americans have a much bigger carbon footprint than people in other countries.
Even our family of energy misers, for example, emitted nearly 75 percent more of the invisible greenhouse gas emissions than the world average.
"It does take a lot more energy to run an industrialized lifestyle," said Jim White, professor of geological sciences at CU. "Many more people around the world live a far more subsistence lifestyle than we'd like to admit."
What might cause Americans to change their habits regarding greenhouse gas emissions?
"If it was a pink gas, it would be a whole lot easier," White said. "The sky would be getting pinker all the time."
3 footprints
Lifestyle changes can greatly affect your greenhouse gas emissions. Read about the carbon trail that three different families leave in the way they live.
Energy misers
Meet the Miser family. This family of four lives in a three-bedroom house in town.
Dad bikes to work. Mom works from home. The kids walk to school.
Mom shops and does errands, driving either the family's Prius hybrid or riding her bike. The family checks the air filter and tire pressure on their car monthly.
This vegetarian family buys organic food and recycles everything they can. They compost, spreading the black stuff around their backyard vegetable plot.
Plane trips? Rarely. They prefer to drive to sites in Colorado or other nearby locales for family vacations.
Their monthly electricity bill is well below the Xcel Energy average of about $57 a household. Their February gas bill is well below the Xcel average of about $108.
TV? Only for the occasional DVD. It's unplugged most of the time. And they don't subscribe to cable.
Mom does use a computer for her home office, but she unplugs it when it's not in use. Lights - many using compact fluorescent bulbs - are turned off when not needed.
The thermostat is turned down in the winter to below 60 degrees. Sweaters are a ubiquitous part of the household wardrobe. They rarely use air conditioning in the summer.
Showers are short, and the hot water temperature is turned down to 120 degrees.
37 tons of carbon dioxide equivalent are released by this family yearly.
110 tons is the U.S. average for a four-person household.
22 tons is the world average.
Average couple
Meet the Kind-of-Average couple. They share a three-bedroom apartment in a nearby suburb.
They each drive Subarus to jobs in the city and use them to run errands and do the shopping on the weekend. They check the air filters and tire pressure occasionally.
They've taken some steps to make their home more energy-efficient. They've installed programmable thermostats in their living room and bedroom. They've replaced a few light bulbs with compact fluorescent bulbs.
Their monthly electricity bill is not far from the Xcel Energy average of about $57 a household. Their February gas bill is not far from the Xcel average of about $108.
They're meat eaters but not at every meal. And they sometimes shop for organic food.
They recycle their bottles and cans - but not their newspapers, cardboard and other materials such as junk mail.
They sometimes give their neighbor leftover food scraps and coffee grinds to throw in her compost bin.
They try to keep the lights turned off when not in use. But the plasma TV is often switched on. They both try not to stay in the shower too long.
They fly to a vacation spot every year, and each flies on a couple of short business trips.
70 tons of carbon dioxide equivalent are released by this family yearly.
53 tons is the U.S. average for a two-person household.
11 tons is the world average.
Energy gluttons
Meet the Glutton family.
This family of four lives in a palatial five-bedroom house in the outer suburbs.
Mom works in Denver and drives a Chevy Suburban more than 60 miles a day to and from the office.
Dad works part time at home and drives a Land Rover. He shuttles the kids to and from school, music lessons, soccer and basketball - depending on the season.
Do they check the air filters and tire pressure on the SUVs? Rarely.
Dad also does the grocery shopping for this meat-loving family that doesn't buy organic or recycle.
Their monthly electricity bill is way above the Xcel Energy average of about $57 a household. Their February gas bill is way above the Xcel average of $108.
While their house is big, it's an older home and not particularly energy-efficient. Cold air comes in the doors and windows in the winter.
The appliances aren't particularly energy- efficient either.
Two big plasma TVs are on frequently, and the three home computers are never unplugged.
Lights are on throughout the house, and the thermostat is cranked up high during winter. The air-conditioning system runs freely in the summer.
Long, hot showers and baths are the norm.
Each year, the family takes at least one long plane trip for a blowout vacation and one short plane trip to see the grandparents.
160 tons of carbon dioxide equivalent are released by this family of four yearly.
Calculate your impact on the environment
These Web sites will help you figure out how much carbon dioxide you create.
carbonfootprint.com/calculator.aspx
climatecrisis.net/takeaction/carboncalculator/safeclimate.net/calculator/
nature.org/initiatives/climatechange/calculator/
epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ind_calculator.html
green.yahoo.com/calculator/
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Featured
-
DPS improvements
This interactive shows you how schools will benefit under the bond proposal.
-
2008 Voter’s Guide
Use our Ballot Builder tool to compare your viewpoints to the candidates.
-
Broncos Game Action
Slide shows of the Broncos-Jags quarter-by-quarter photos from Invesco.
-
Rocky Truth Patrol
Rocky Truth Patrol investigates a claim about Colorado Sen. Shawn Mitchell
-
A Dozen on Denver
Manuel Ramos' story is featured this week on 'A Dozen on Denver.' Check it out!
-
Presidential Elections
See how Colorado counties have voted through the years.
-
Rocky Multimedia
The news comes alive in our videos and slide shows. Catch up on today's events.
-
County election profiles
A look at how residents in each Colorado county may vote.
-
A dream fulfilled
A Rocky Mountain News and MediaStorm production
February 18, 2008
5 a.m.
Suggest removal
CP writes:
We already know how big Al Gore's footprint is with his multiple homes and jet. And what has he done beside buy "carbon offsets" from his own company? Nothing, no reduction. Walk the talk.
February 18, 2008
5:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
adhoc writes:
I'm an average energy user but I'll buy indulgences...er...carbon credits, if you can make me feel guilty enough. Maybe I'll just plant some trees and flowers in my yard.
February 18, 2008
7:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
An_Engineer writes:
An article that demonstrates the author's lack of understanding of science and engineering.
The concept of the so-called "carbon footprint" is irrelevant. The result of utilizing carbon to produce energy is carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. In fact, carbon dioxide is a key element for plant growth. No carbon dioxide, no plants. No plants, no other forms of life, including humans.
Additionally, there is no scientifically validated link between human produced carbon dioxide and the average temperature of the planet. Unless, of course, one tends to believe the output of climate models. One little problem with the climate model output is the results never actually match with real data.
In light of that fact, I ask the author, Mr.Fillion, to provide the empirical data validated by the scientific method that proves that recent variations in global average temperature are only caused by human-produced carbon dioxide. If you can demonstrate that causal link, then you should be advocating the use of a carbon footprint calculation. If you can not provide the casual link, then it is irresponsible to promote concern over the carbon component of energy usage.
I'll be waiting for you to publish your data, as well as your sources...
February 18, 2008
7:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
pak writes:
In 2005 China built 119 coal fired power plants. Now they build 1 every 3 weeks. 450,000 years of ice core data shows CO2 is a lagging indicator occuring 1300 years after warming. We are coming out of the mid-evil cooling period and increasing CO2 is a natural event , not man caused. The enviros are flat out lying to us to achieve their form of socialism. Pay attention!!!
February 18, 2008
8:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
Theoldguy writes:
I moved out of Denver to the sticks. I grow five acres of alfalfa. I hardly drive and have a horse. The manure gets thrown into the neighbors' row crops and gets tilled back into the soil. The house is definitely smaller than the Colorado house since the kids are gone. Yup, I've "downsized" considerably. It's also much cheaper living than "back there".
February 18, 2008
12:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
rickg19611 writes:
Size 12
February 18, 2008
12:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
greenleaf writes:
rickg,
That's actually a clever comment! For your sake, I hope it's not true because you would be wasting a heck of a lot of money! I recommend a size 9 at most!
February 18, 2008
2:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
tunaman65 writes:
My answer to the question.
Don't care.
February 18, 2008
3:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
italiaboy9 writes:
I love how they use Japanese cars for those people who are under the average or at average. makes me laugh.
February 18, 2008
4:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
NotYours writes:
Regardless of whether humans are causing climate change, the method of message delivery is suspect.
Those who yell the loudest about carbon-footprints and the highly-questionable "offset programs" are among the highest footprints of all people on the planet. Yet these independently wealthy, famous, and powerful people wag their accusatory fingers at average Americans.
If you expect to make any progress, replace the super-rich "own my own airplane" spokespeople who are personally polluting the planet by many multiples above the average American household. This means you SuperPolluter Al Gore, Laurie David, Babs Streisand, John "707" Travolta, Leo "globetrotter" DiCaprio, Keanu Reeves, Cheryl "one square of TP" Crow, et.al.
1. Nobody likes a hypocrite.
2. The end does NOT justify the means.
3. The rich, powerful, and famous are NOT more equal than you. Do NOT give these SuperPolluters a pass!!
February 18, 2008
4:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
mac5150 writes:
No reduction eh CP? Better check your facts. Gore actually upgraded his home and it now gets a Gold rating from the Green Building Council's certification program. Reduced electricity usage by 11% or about 6900 kw hrs. He still uses a lot but don't come on here and spread lies about no reduction.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/1...
February 18, 2008
5:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
greenleaf writes:
Not Yours,
It's easy to be seen as a hypocrite when a celebrity uses their fame to influence the debate. I am an environmentalist, but I was offended when Barbara Streisand decided she should lecture the rest of us. She offered tips on saving water and energy from her"base", a multi acre estate in Southern California. I later saw photographs of her palatial home and realized that she might use more energy than a small African village!
These folks are much like the rest of us. Don't you wish you would be given a thousand votes to tip an election or ... the fame and finances to influence or aggravate based upon the person hearing your message?
Money and fame ARE power, like it or not! They have it, we don't! IF we had it, many of us would use it as well. Does that make it right, I don't know ?
Unfortunately, this might be a case of the messenger shooting the message.
Mac5150,
Personally, I appreciate Gore's efforts because they aren't token or shallow as many of the celebrity crusader's efforts are. He has also been an environmentalist for many years, even before he was vice president. I do put him in a class above. I just wish he had gotten his house in order before touring the planet. He's a very smart man and I think that he could have seen this coming. Don't you?
February 18, 2008
8:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
prk166 writes:
Gore lecturing on us about carbon reduction is like a prostitute lecturing us on abstinence.
February 26, 2008
2:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
mac5150 writes:
True, he should have seen this coming and at least announced plans on how he was going to modify his house. Personal PR, unfortunately, hasn't been one of his strongest assets.