Eye Opener: Ecological Footprint

I took the Ecological Footprint Quiz from the Redefining Progress website. After completing the quiz and receiving my results, I was shocked to learn that if everyone on the planet lived my lifestyle, we would need 4.48 earths to sustain our activities!!! I had previously thought of myself as an environmentally conscious person, but there are obviously more ways that I can reduce my footprint!

I liked this quiz because it created four categories of consumption within the measurement of my environmental impact. These categories include: Carbon Footprint, Food Footprint, Housing Footprint, and Goods & Service Footprint. My impact was compared to the country average in each category. I exceeded the country average in my Food Footprint and my Housing Footprint.

To reduce my footprint, the website recommended several strategies in each category of consumption. There were several tips that I had never thought of before, including:

• Avoid allowing your car to idle. If you’ll be waiting for more than 30 seconds, turn off the engine (except in traffic). And don’t take the drive-through—park the car and walk inside instead.


• Defrost your refrigerator and freezer regularly.


• Purchase carbon offsets to make up for the energy use you can’t eliminate.


• Eat lower on the food chain—going meatless for just one meal a week can make a difference. Globally, it has been estimated that 18% of all greenhouse gas emissions are associated with meat consumption.

I feel that there are many financial barriers for college students wishing to become more environmentally friendly. I strive to do little things every day with the intention that they will accumulate and make a dent in the world’s effort to conserve our environment. I feel that once I have more control over my living situation (i.e. permanent home and stable income), I will be able to make an even bigger impact on our environment!

Share & Voice: What ARE the skeptics saying?

As you all know, on Thursday in class, we began watching An Inconvenient Truth. Throughout the documentary, Al Gore expresses his main concerns about the issue of global warming. On several occasions, he mentions “the skeptics,” but fails to go into great detail on their viewpoints. I have seen this documentary a few other times, and this question has always bugged me: What exactly are the skeptics of global warming saying? What are they saying that is correct or incorrect? What is the other side of the story? I decided to do a little research on the internet to find an answer.

It was difficult to find credible information that wasn’t biased towards certain stances on global warming. Here is one statement that I found from Friends of Science, a non-profit research group based in Canada:

"It is our opinion that the Sun is the main direct and indirect driver of climate change."

I pose this challenge to you: What information can you find? What are the critics of global warming saying (right or wrong)?

Review of Reading 27: Seeing Green: Knowing and Saving the Environment on Film

This article provided an in-depth summary of the role of mass media in disseminating information about environmental issues. More specifically, the author comments on how documentary films portray environmental issues, distribute blame, and suggest solutions. The author, Luis A. Vivanco, recognizes a distinct compatibility between nature and film, which he highlights throughout his discussion.

The Fantasies of Natural History Film
The author mentions two books about filming in relation to nature: Wildlife Films and Reel Nature: America’s Romance with Wildlife on Film. Both of these books suggest that wildlife films trade the objectivity of science for the thrill of stimulated entertainment. These films are termed as “docu-dramas.” Overall, there is a significant gap between the reality of nature and the assumption of how it should be portrayed on film.

Framing Environmental Degradation
This section discusses the portrayal of environmental destruction in films such as Since the Company Came and Second Nature: Building Forests in West Africa’s Savannas. The first film fails to investigate the true cause of local destruction and conflict, while the second film reveals this error. It is suggested that most films do not mention the beneficial factors of environmental degradation that go hand-in-hand with enhancing biodiversity. Rather, they focus on blaming based on misconceptions.

Visualizing Green Crusades
In films like Save the Panda, The Rhino War, Tong Tana: The Lost Paradise, and The Shaman’s Apprentice, efforts to conserve the environment are depicted in a valiant manner. People who are attempting to save the environment are seen as “heroes,” and strategies involving mistrust and belligerence are accepted. These films end up ignoring the voice of the local people that they intend to support. The overbearing attempt to protect the environment sometimes results in doing more harm than good for the overall situation.

My Thoughts
Overall, I thought this article provided a fair representation of both the negative and positive aspects of environmental filming. The topic definitely raises a few questions! Why does society have such an unhealthy obsession with entertainment as opposed to education? Why don’t filmmakers always use research to back up their claims? Why don’t people think before they act? How are we supposed to empathize with the problems of the environment when they are being inaccurately portrayed? In order to encourage society to be more motivated to change the environment, I believe that environmental documentaries need to be more educational, factual, and inclusive. In general, we need to be more aware of what we are watching and recognize the intended message and determine whether it is credible or not. For more information about the media's involvement with the environment, check out the Environmental Media Association’s website!

List of New Terms
Nonmediagenic – without influence from the communications media
Ethnograhy – the study and systematic recording of human cultures
Anthropomorphism - an interpretation of what is not human or personal in terms of human characteristics
Dehistoricized – no use of historical material
Bioprospecting - to search for substances that are produced by living organisms and may be of medicinal or commercial value
Ecotourism - the practice of touring natural habitats in a manner meant to minimize ecological impact