Eco footprint 2.0

And why would we need another one? Well,

How can one compare the value of a single fish to that of a bushel of corn or a California redwood? How does that relationship change from the exhaust pouring out of your car or the dishwater circling your drain?
The methodology for answering these questions in ecological footprint analysis (EFA) is often criticized for being incomplete and for underestimating humanity's true impact on the environment. In response, researchers at Redefining Progress have made several amendments to the standard methodology, and given their creation the handle 'Ecological Footprint 2.0.'

Helpful article which also tells us what is still to be integrated into the analysis.

still missing from EF 2.0 and other methods is a way to account for the footprint of myriad other pollutants besides carbon. Presently, carbon is the only pollutant that ecological footprints consider. (Not surprising, considering the gravity of global warming) But there are many other pollutants that have significant deleterious effects on the environment, such as dioxins, mercury and endocrine-disruptors. With countries such as China and India growing massively in their production, these pollutants will make their impact felt by the environment as well as human health.

WorldChanging: Tools, Models and Ideas for Building a Bright Green Future: Ecological Footprint 2.0

Technorati Tags: ecological_footprint,